Nice dodge. :rolleyes: The glaringly obvious POINT is that nobody, including you, can predict how dangerous or even deadly a pregnancy can become for the mother. That’s why many abortions are performed.
The second lingering point, which others have made in this thread many times, is that this whole thing is not simple. It certainly isn’t as simple as you insist that it is.
And you still have addressed nothing in regard to post #1710, which has a list of not-so-simple scenarios that should be considered.
I understand what you are saying. I am saying pro-choicers are anti-life to prove a point. How do you feel when I call them anti-life? Probably the same way I feel when I am labeled anti-choice. I am pro-life or anti-abortion. You’re pretty much the only pro-choicer on this thread that I have any respect for. At least you are able to make an argument and support your opinions. I can’t say that for any of the others though.
It was not my intent to offend you. Take care.
Why don’t you go and bake some cookies?
I wear a size 8 shoe. Sometimes I wear a 9. My blood pressure is fine now but I did have pre-eclampsia with my first pregnancy. I bet you’re sad that I made it through that ok.
You’re a mean, vicious person. I hope stalking me repeatedly has made you feel better about your poor pathetic existence.
Nice. No I actually had pre-eclampsia. I had a high risk pregnancy. I had to get weekly ultrasounds, biophysical profiles, non-stress tests etc. I don’t give a flying shit that you don’t believe me though.
Man there are some real whackos on these boards.
I’m sure this advice will mean nothing to you, but I’ll give it a shot anyway - right now, your posts are indistinguishable from those of a trolling 16 year-old. If you want to be taken seriously at all, you’re going to have to write some that a 16 year-old boy wouldn’t - possibly something insightful, well-considered… you know (or maybe you don’t)… adult.
You know, I think classy is showing some capacity to learn. Amazing for a kid like him. I’ve (figuratively speaking) poked him with a stick a couple of times and he’s not responding, or rising to the bait. Maybe I’m blocked or on “ignore” but at least it shows he’s grown a couple of brain cells.
Of course it doesn’t mean he’s smart yet, but the potential may be there.
I see Bryan has already given a particularly good response, but I’ll ad my 2 cents just for fun.
I echo Bryan’s observations on this. Ultimately people’s personal opinions do matter, since our law is shaped, enforced and changed by people. The law and the execution of it is imperfect being influenced by people and all their foibles.
I would say at birth as well. I think the numbers concerning abortion indicate women are generally making responsible decisions. {by my standard}
They should. Who gets to decide what responsible behavior is, and how it’s encouraged or enforced?
I don’t know what law you might be talking about. Most laws sure don’t get full conformity. We can look into history and see laws that simply aren’t realistically enforceable. Prohibition is a good example, and the laws against safe legal abortion seem to be another. People didn’t lobby against them because they served us so well.
You keep saying that and it still isn’t true. It’s a unique situation that has to weigh the rights of women, whom we acknowledge as citizens with full rights, and the unborn, whom we do not acknowledge as citizens with full rights. In the weighing, the women win. Even if we acknowledged the unborn as persons, in what other situation would the law enslave someone physically to another person, even if their life is in the balance?
I already have a post that gives you a collection of your statements about choice. I’m not going to now argue the definition of definition. You attempted to defend your statement that Choice is a misnomer and you failed miserably.
You mean the anti life baby killers are taking the extreme stand? That’s quite an imagination you got there.
I do my reading based on time and interest so I don’t read every post. No matter. You insistence that pro choicers are completely discounting the unborn is imaginary. More of your non existent mind reading powers. The fact that we simply don’t agree with you on the weighing of rights, or that pro choice supporters have varied opinions and feelings about the unborn, doesn’t support your argument that the unborn are not considered.
Not even a little.
Nobody can stop you from throwing labels around no matter how inaccurate they are. Words have meanings and meanings matter. Maybe not to you, but to most people.
Personally I think it’s pretty normal for people to think some individuals are worth more than others, regardless of what moral absolutes they like to give lip service to. Would we value Einstein more than Ted Bundy? In this issue , it’s not even that. For some people, an embryo is not an individual, and even if it was , what obligates another individual to be it’s unwilling biological slave for 9 months, and endure the other variables that come with that. In what other weighing of individual worth would we mandate that?
and if only the world was perfect we wouldn’t even need to discuss this. Dang reality anyway.
But I never argued that. I wish you would respond to what I actually wrote instead of the meaning you prefer to argue against. {I can understand why you enjoy this kind of unproductive response. It can be fun}
How important did I say it was? Are you trying that mind reading again? Doesn’t work ya know.
Oh I know I did but thanks for finally admitting it anyway.
Effective for what? Yanking people’s chains and entertaining yourself?
People vary in attitudes, opinions, and degree of knowledge. Personally, I enter these discussions to try and understand the opposition better, be exposed to new information, and clarify my own position by writing it out. The fact that some pro lifers have little to say that’s interesting doesn’t make **Bricker’s ** less interesting. IOW, the failings of some individuals arguments don’t mean crap about the overall discussion.
That’s the beauty of choice. Since we don’t have a clear definition of personhood, we don’t ask you to accept ours. We just ask that your personal opinion about it , isn’t forced on others.
Nope, but feel free to give me page and post number and try to show otherwise. You won’t be able to but go ahead and try.
There could be a number of reasons, but rather than guess I’ll just ask that you cut it out.
They aren’t? Depends on who you ask doesn’t it? Your argument is nonsense because “wrong” is so subjective and situational. As a race and society there are some general guidelines we’ve agreed on but there are a shitload of grey areas and personal perspectives.
Listing things we have agreed upon as a society doesn’t make wrong less subjective. I can’t smoke grass just because it might be okay with me, but a whole lot of people don’t think it’s wrong. Stop wasting time with this semantic nonsense.
It’s becoming apparent you’re not mature enough to admit it when you’re wrong.
It doesn’t matter when you typed it. It was wrong then and it’s wrong now, and I spelled it out pretty clearly.
This seems to be a old standby of yours when you can no longer engage the actual argument. You’re correct though, that’s not why it’s ridiculous. There are much better reasons which I’ve spelled out.
Really, Gee whiz. Tell me , does the law differentiate between the two? I think it does. If a policeman pulls over a pregnant woman does he list the “child” as a passenger in his report?
I really can’t tell if you actually believe all these word games of yours or it’s just entertainment for you. Doesn’t matter. I think I’ve seen all you have to offer.
Uh-huh… assuming this is true, you realize that an abortion ban could very easily have killed you, right? OB/GYNs leaving the specialty because they don’t want to deal with the abortion police, or possibly performing abortions illegally because they recognize the need and getting arrested… then you come along with your high-risk pregnancy and find you can’t get any medical appointments or prenatal care because the OB/GYNs have been driven out of your state…
But I figure you’re lying, anyway, so it’s academic.
They determine when they’re hungry, when they’re cold, when they’re in pain, when they’re sleepy, when they need a fresh diaper. And they let you know about it, quite vociferously.
And more importantly, anyone can fulfill the needs of a newborn. You can literally take a newborn a second from birth and hand them to a complete stranger and their needs will be met. A fetus cannot be given over to another person to be gestated.
If you were able to legally own the guns, no, you probably couldn’t be stopped if you could find someone capable of performing such a surgery. There would, of course, be penalties if you used your machine gun arms against others. And you know, there are people now who have functioning limbs amputated for personal “body modification” reasons. It may not be a healthy choice, but who has the authority to tell a person that they have to keep an arm that they don’t want to keep?
Oh, but you do. Because you do believe that women should be forced to continue pregnancies against their will. That means that every mother won’t be a willing mother, and de facto means that every child born won’t be a wanted child. (Don’t talk to me about adoption. There are more than 400,000 children waiting, in our foster system, whose biological parents’ rights have been terminated and who are legally free for adoption. When they all have permanent homes, then you can tell me that every baby born to women who cannot terminate unwanted pregnancies will be “wanted.”)
The majority of women (more than 60%) who terminate pregnancies in the US were using contraceptives in the month when they conceived. Contraceptives fail. They fail by nature of the vagaries of human design, they fail by virtue of humans’ innate imperfection.
Even with 100% contraceptive use there will be unintended pregnancies; with the limited access to contraceptives (and information about proper use) we currently have and will continue to have in this nation (because of our broken healthcare system and lack of proper sexual education in schools) at least one-half of all pregnancies in the U.S. are unintended. It is only because abortion is so difficult to access as it is that our rate is as low as it is.
I think there’s a couple of problems with that. One might be whether those advancements are actually applicable. I mean, if those advancements are things like ventilators or otherwise large or complicated equipment, it isn’t necessarily so that they would likely also be used in cases of illegal abortions. It’s not like doctors are going to have an easy time smuggling such things out of hospitals (or that people within those hospitals are inattentive enough to notice such things are in use/missing). Even when it comes to superior drugs, these are things which would have to be stolen. It’s not so simple to be able to point to advances in technology, because some advances are those connected with an equipped and supplied hospital, with trained medical personnel. What makes abortion more safe nowadays doesn’t necessarily imply that illegal abortion would likewise be more safe.
I do have an issue with your figures (though you’re getting them from your opposition); by the point Roe v. Wade came about, public opinion was already changing. Doctors would be more willing to take risks to perform them. If potential future anti-abortion legistlation were strict enough (as I believe some would prefer), then you’d actually have a much bigger rise in number of problems than would be indicated by the pre-RvW numbers. And hey, if nothing else, there’s a larger population, too.
So if the doctor feels that the pregnancy needs to be ended to save the life of the mother then you don’t have a problem with it. How do you reconcile this with your repeated statements that human life begins with conception and that ending that life is murder? It sounds to me like you’re saying that under certain circumstances abortion is acceptable.
Yeah, I’ve seen this in previous threads - users who want abortion banned and yet refuse to recognize the consequences, elaborate on how many law-enforcement resources to dedicate to the perceived problem, what (if anything) to do with women who take day trips to Canada…
It’s like they think an abortion ban will be enforced by magical pro-life elves.
Which shows the unsustainable nature of the beliefs of the subset of anti-abortion rights people who loudly and repeatedly proclaim that abortion is murder. Because when pushed they don’t want it treated as murder - they don’t tend to want life sentences or capital punishment for the 18 year old girl who was raped who has an abortion, or for the doctor who performs the procedure. Or her parents who drive her to the clinic. Or for a volunteer at a charity who answers a phone and gives the girl the phone number of a clinic in a different country that can safely do the procedure.
Yes, they want to punish those involved, but at a tariff significantly lower than that which attaches to murder.