|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 20, 2013 23:57:23 GMT -6
I do not take orders but thanks. As long as millions of innocent human life is being torn apart vacuumed, limbs torn off and flushed is going on, while the the holier then thou are preaching the DP is cruel and unusual and barbaric/bloodthirsty? Beats me. Didn't know him. How come? Eugenics, abortion & nazism are historically interwined and you know that..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 1:45:57 GMT -6
Even the minister at my church believes women should be able to have an abortion if their life was genuinelly at risk The problem you have with that if you believe in abortion "in certain circumstances," you believe in abortion. If the Rs in this country could let go of their fascination with forced childbearing, they might get elected sometime in the next 20 years or so. It doesn't work like the DP. You sholdn't force woman to risk their own lives to bring a child to term anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 1:48:36 GMT -6
Abolish dp, do away with guns and let the woman decide. Yours truly euroliberal Nils. :-) Yeah, but its never something women decide on their own anyway. I know someone who assists women with crisis pregnancies. Often the women have sought assistance because everyone else in their world wants them to have an abortion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 2:01:07 GMT -6
I think you are arguing the exception case and not the typical case. The vast majority of women don't choose to have an abortion because their life is at stake. Most women who choose to have an abortion do so, because they feel they are unable to take on the responsibilities at that time, or they don't want to take on the responsibilities of a family at that time. Even the minister at my church believes women should be able to have an abortion if their life was genuinelly at risk and when being honest one has to admit that is a choice too - whether to risk their life and continue to carry the baby, or not - so pro choice, and it should, most importantly, remain their own and their doctors' choice, not the government's to me it's also pro-life in choosing an abortion in the early stages where the fetus is not viable anyway, so they can keep on affording to feed and clothe and house the children (perhaps even the ones they already have) I don't know about Australia but decent daycare costs a fortune here. And most homes have both parents working so they can make it these days. in the case of the life of the mother, it is also pro life, and pro any existing children that were already born being able to keep having a mommy... No one should be forced by the law to follow what someone else's preacher proclaims Killing the unborn because because you can't pay for the child care is barbaric. It is putting economics above human life. We punish people for manslaughter for killing the unborn here, on the rationale that the unborn child should be recognised as a seperate human being, but justify abortion on demand because it isn't a seperate human being. You can only choose one. I think one of these days someone is going to try and defend a homicide charge relating to the death of an unborn child by arguing that it is merely a lump of flesh. Next time a woman wants to complain about an unwanted pregnancy then they should talk to someone who can't have children, but desperately want one.
|
|
|
Post by honeyroastedpeanut on Jan 21, 2013 4:18:21 GMT -6
Eugenics, abortion & nazism are historically interwined and you know that.. Gee, I really hope no woman on this board has had an abortion so far because you just showed them a huge middle finger with this sentence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 7:18:08 GMT -6
Eugenics, abortion & nazism are historically interwined and you know that.. Gee, I really hope no woman on this board has had an abortion so far because you just showed them a huge middle finger with this sentence. There have been a few on this board who have mentioned having an abortion.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 21, 2013 9:42:58 GMT -6
Eugenics, abortion & nazism are historically interwined and you know that.. Gee, I really hope no woman on this board has had an abortion so far because you just showed them a huge middle finger with this sentence. No, reasonable constraints on abortion are needed. As with euthanasia, DP etc.Who lives who dies and why.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 21, 2013 10:12:51 GMT -6
Even the minister at my church believes women should be able to have an abortion if their life was genuinelly at risk The problem you have with that if you believe in abortion "in certain circumstances," you believe in abortion. If the Rs in this country could let go of their fascination with forced childbearing, they might get elected sometime in the next 20 years or so. Problem is if anyone agrees with abortion "on demand" or under certain circumstances" then they also agree with the DP.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 13:10:54 GMT -6
and when being honest one has to admit that is a choice too - whether to risk their life and continue to carry the baby, or not - so pro choice, and it should, most importantly, remain their own and their doctors' choice, not the government's to me it's also pro-life in choosing an abortion in the early stages where the fetus is not viable anyway, so they can keep on affording to feed and clothe and house the children (perhaps even the ones they already have) I don't know about Australia but decent daycare costs a fortune here. And most homes have both parents working so they can make it these days. in the case of the life of the mother, it is also pro life, and pro any existing children that were already born being able to keep having a mommy... No one should be forced by the law to follow what someone else's preacher proclaims Killing the unborn because because you can't pay for the child care is barbaric. It is putting economics above human life. We punish people for manslaughter for killing the unborn here, on the rationale that the unborn child should be recognised as a seperate human being, but justify abortion on demand because it isn't a seperate human being. You can only choose one. I think one of these days someone is going to try and defend a homicide charge relating to the death of an unborn child by arguing that it is merely a lump of flesh. Next time a woman wants to complain about an unwanted pregnancy then they should talk to someone who can't have children, but desperately want one. it's more like you have to be able to pay for daycare to be able to work and feed the children you already have, the living children that are already fully developed human beings with personalities that we know, rather than a fetus that is nowhere near being able to survive as a separate being yet not being able to afford to support any more children is a fact of life for many people in a society that has no shame at paying so many people so much less than a living wage that is the non-drama-queen version of the reality that many women in this world must face Economics are pretty damned important when it is your living children you are working 2 jobs to support already, and you would all be homeless and hungry if you couldn't.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 15:12:43 GMT -6
Abolish dp, do away with guns and let the woman decide. Yours truly euroliberal Nils. :-) Yeah, but its never something women decide on their own anyway. I know someone who assists women with crisis pregnancies. Often the women have sought assistance because everyone else in their world wants them to have an abortion. that doesn't sound like anyone forced them to have an abortion. That sounds like they didn't have one, so they were able to choose what they wanted for themselves under their own beliefs... a good thing
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 17:24:44 GMT -6
Even the minister at my church believes women should be able to have an abortion if their life was genuinelly at risk The problem you have with that if you believe in abortion "in certain circumstances," you believe in abortion. If the Rs in this country could let go of their fascination with forced childbearing, they might get elected sometime in the next 20 years or so. No they are working on the fact that those who vote for them will have larger families and therefor more voters
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 17:33:11 GMT -6
pro choice, pro gun control (In Austnot really informed enough to have opinion of US) and anti DP
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 17:41:35 GMT -6
Abolish dp, do away with guns and let the woman decide. Yours truly euroliberal Nils. :-) Yeah, but its never something women decide on their own anyway. I know someone who assists women with crisis pregnancies. Often the women have sought assistance because everyone else in their world wants them to have an abortion. Thats true, sometimes people with their own agenda get in the way.
|
|
|
Post by Kay on Jan 21, 2013 17:56:33 GMT -6
and when being honest one has to admit that is a choice too - whether to risk their life and continue to carry the baby, or not - so pro choice, and it should, most importantly, remain their own and their doctors' choice, not the government's to me it's also pro-life in choosing an abortion in the early stages where the fetus is not viable anyway, so they can keep on affording to feed and clothe and house the children (perhaps even the ones they already have) I don't know about Australia but decent daycare costs a fortune here. And most homes have both parents working so they can make it these days. in the case of the life of the mother, it is also pro life, and pro any existing children that were already born being able to keep having a mommy... No one should be forced by the law to follow what someone else's preacher proclaims Killing the unborn because because you can't pay for the child care is barbaric. It is putting economics above human life. We punish people for manslaughter for killing the unborn here, on the rationale that the unborn child should be recognised as a seperate human being, but justify abortion on demand because it isn't a seperate human being. You can only choose one. I think one of these days someone is going to try and defend a homicide charge relating to the death of an unborn child by arguing that it is merely a lump of flesh. Next time a woman wants to complain about an unwanted pregnancy then they should talk to someone who can't have children, but desperately want one. Why on earth would you think you have the right to tell another woman she must bear a child? Abortion is not a choice I could make personally, but I DO NOT have license to tell another woman what she should do with her body. Have you adopted unwanted children, participated in foster care for the abused and neglected?
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Jan 21, 2013 20:09:57 GMT -6
The problem you have with that if you believe in abortion "in certain circumstances," you believe in abortion. If the Rs in this country could let go of their fascination with forced childbearing, they might get elected sometime in the next 20 years or so. It doesn't work like the DP. You sholdn't force woman to risk their own lives to bring a child to term anyway. Do you have a reading comprehension problem?
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Jan 21, 2013 20:14:43 GMT -6
Problem is if anyone agrees with abortion "on demand" or under certain circumstances" then they also agree with the DP. It may be a "problem" for you, but not me. I've long said being ant-dp and pro-choice is hypocritical. Human life is either sacred, and should be preserved at all costs, or it's not. I don't happen to believe it is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 20:29:50 GMT -6
I dont believe life begins at conception. A fetus is not a baby and is not a life, in my opinion abortion is a medical procedure and should be available on demand before a certain gestation without exception. A murdering evil scum bag is still a living person and their life should not be taken, even if they have taken another. Thats my stance anyway
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 22:15:41 GMT -6
Killing the unborn because because you can't pay for the child care is barbaric. It is putting economics above human life. We punish people for manslaughter for killing the unborn here, on the rationale that the unborn child should be recognised as a seperate human being, but justify abortion on demand because it isn't a seperate human being. You can only choose one. I think one of these days someone is going to try and defend a homicide charge relating to the death of an unborn child by arguing that it is merely a lump of flesh. Next time a woman wants to complain about an unwanted pregnancy then they should talk to someone who can't have children, but desperately want one. it's more like you have to be able to pay for daycare to be able to work and feed the children you already have, the living children that are already fully developed human beings with personalities that we know, rather than a fetus that is nowhere near being able to survive as a separate being yet not being able to afford to support any more children is a fact of life for many people in a society that has no shame at paying so many people so much less than a living wage that is the non-drama-queen version of the reality that many women in this world must face Economics are pretty damned important when it is your living children you are working 2 jobs to support already, and you would all be homeless and hungry if you couldn't. Whatever way you put it, it is still ending a human life. If I was put in that position I could see myself having the abortion but it doesn't make it right.
|
|
|
Post by SubSurfCPO(ret) on Jan 24, 2013 20:32:37 GMT -6
So, the poll shows this group tends to lean Pro-DP (62.5%) no big surprise. Pro Gun Control - 62.5% - interesting and slightly Pro-Choice (52%) - not really that surprizing. I think these numbers can be verfied (somewhat) by the tenor of conversations here.
However, the Pro-Choice discussion dominates this thread which would lend a justification to the close vote.
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Jan 24, 2013 21:44:02 GMT -6
Pro Gun Control - 62.5% - interesting It's been my experience those who don't enjoy the shooting sports fear firearms. Also, we have a lot of Euroweenies (and airheaded Aussie women) here and that plays into the equation as well. Women are generally pro-choice because almost all can see themselves in a situation where they're PG and don't want the child.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 25, 2013 0:31:31 GMT -6
Showing my age here a bit, yet when I was in HS especially on Fridays, kids with cars had rifles in them for going hunting after school.. No one thought of using the rifles to kill anyone. Guns and rifles were all over almost everyone had them. In the USA there were just as many guns back then as today. Hell, we did not even lock our cars or doors at night. I grew up in a suburb just outside Chicago..
I fine it hard to blame the gun...with how many guns that are out there, by lawful people?? Give me a break it is not the guns...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2013 7:47:33 GMT -6
Pro Gun Control - 62.5% - interesting It's been my experience those who don't enjoy the shooting sports fear firearms. Also, we have a lot of Euroweenies (and airheaded Aussie women) here and that plays into the equation as well. Women are generally pro-choice because almost all can see themselves in a situation where they're PG and don't want the child. There is nothing wrong with owning a firearm because you have a hobby or because you actually have a purpose for it. However having firearms because it is cool or you think owning a litt,e pop gun will help you take on a rogue government if they turn nasty you are delusional
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Jan 25, 2013 8:33:00 GMT -6
There is nothing wrong with owning a firearm because you have a hobby or because you actually have a purpose for it. Thank you for your acknowledgement of my Constitutional right. As to the above remark, how do you think the United States became a nation? “Don't fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.” — Captain John Parker, Battle of Lexington, 1775.
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Jan 25, 2013 10:16:27 GMT -6
Pro-DP.
Pro-gun rights.
Pro-choice. Abortion on demand. No restrictions, for any reason, no explanation necessary.
It strikes me as philosophically inconsistent to be pro-DP and pro-life. You either believe life is sacred, or you don't.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 25, 2013 10:27:38 GMT -6
Pro-DP. Pro-gun rights. Pro-choice. Abortion on demand. No restrictions, for any reason, no explanation necessary. It strikes me as philosophically inconsistent to be pro-DP and pro-life. You either believe life is sacred, or you don't. Strikes me as inconsistant to be anti Dp yet pro abortion Oh let me use "choice" to end innocent life ( due to not wanting/burden overpopulation etc..) Over saving those who kill off innocent life "killers. Obviously life is not really sacred when millions of on demand abortions is acceptable. While fighting for no death penalty. No offense but, men play a large part in the number of abortions too.
|
|
|
Post by SubSurfCPO(ret) on Jan 25, 2013 13:37:10 GMT -6
No offense but, men play a large part in the number of abortions too. You are a master of the obvious ;D
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 25, 2013 16:06:53 GMT -6
No offense but, men play a large part in the number of abortions too. You are a master of the obvious ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2013 19:40:54 GMT -6
Pro-DP. Pro-gun rights. Pro-choice. Abortion on demand. No restrictions, for any reason, no explanation necessary. It strikes me as philosophically inconsistent to be pro-DP and pro-life. You either believe life is sacred, or you don't. I disagree, you take someone's life because they ended someone else's. You can't have abortion on demand as abortion is risky especially in late term. A woman who is 26 weeks is probably better off delivering it if she is otherwise healthy. Abortion at that stage is pretty much as arduous as birth. She can adopt the child out.
|
|
|
Post by Donnie on Jan 25, 2013 21:35:34 GMT -6
Abolish dp, do away with guns and let the woman decide. Yours truly euroliberal Nils. :-) What if the woman is a girl?
|
|
|
Post by Donnie on Jan 25, 2013 21:39:57 GMT -6
Why on earth would you think you have the right to tell another woman she must bear a child? Abortion is not a choice I could make personally, but I DO NOT have license to tell another woman what she should do with her body. When a woman has an abortion she is doing very little to her body compared to what she is having done to the tiny human body that is given no choice.
|
|