Your first comment is something I can agree with in sentiment if not in phrasing. Yes, among those who espouse a pro-“life” agenda are those who seem to feel that “life” only matters if it’s a fetus, and American at that.
But there are many factions within the anti-abortion umbrella, and not all of them agree on things like the war in Iraq or the death penalty or any “culture of life” issues.
Your second question is silly. How many women have you escorted to abortion clinics? How many abortions have you paid for? Better, how many women have you escorted to health clinics for birth control?
No, because there’s a big difference between lunacy and mere nuttiness. Moreover, as I already pointed out, Beware of Doug was referring to people who allegedly daydream about torturing abortionists, as opposed to the lunatics who commit outright acts of violence.
Additionally, setting such distinctions aside, I must reiterate my previous questions to him. How do you know that these people – whoever you may be referring to – do indeed daydream of committing violent acts against practitioners of abortion? And how do you know that they would extend those same fantasies to women, minorities and leftists? Is there any evidence for your claims, and if so, what manner of technology did you use to read these people’s minds?
Or are you merely pulling accusations out of thin air?
As to birth control, I’m a bit more hesitant. Ultimately I agree that sex with birth control is better than sex without for unmarried folks. I hestitate only because I fear that widespread birth control may have the effect of encouraging sex where it otherwise might not happen. But frankly, I feel that tiger is already out of the cage. While my response to this is a bit more nuanced, in the end, yes, I favor availibility of birth control.
Absolutely.
Yes.
Maybe. I’d want to discuss guidelines of the expansion.
Nope. Here I believe you’d be shifting the burden of payments to employers.
Qualified yes - I’d want to get details on the programs.
A hypocrite espouses one view but believes and practices another.
What specific view of mine fits that category?
Did you even begin to understand my objection to Roe v. Wade? It says there is a federal constitututional right to an abortion. I believe that should not be so: that is, a fair and reasonable reading of the Constitution should not reach that result.
In what way is that remotely hypocritical?
Please be specific. Don’t assert a general hypocrisy and fail to define it. What, SPECIFICALLY, am I hypocritical in saying, doing, or believing?
To answer your question though, yes, I have taken in an abused child. I didn’t formally adopt him. I just raised him with my own children. I didn’t rally against child abuse and force my political leader to do the same if he wanted my support.
My point is, what happens to all those children born as a result of the anti abortion campaign? If a mother doesn’t want a child, what happens? The child abuse you mentioned. So it’s time for money where your mouth is!
On this board, the issues where I lean conservative tend to get far more play than the issues on which I lean liberal. But I’ve said before that it’s tough finding a politicial figure - much less a party - to which I can give unqualified support. Sure, I favor eliminating abortion, which puts me square with the majority of Republicans… where I find no one who’s willing to condemn the death penalty, which I also abhor.
So too with issues of social policy and justice. While in many areas I tend to be more free-market and winner-take-all, the issues of care of true innocents: unborn and newborns – cries out for help from society. And the best way society can steer ANY trend is by giving not just immediate aid, but tools - education - to prevent recurrence of the problems at issue.
No, they’re not. You asked if pro-lifers are willing to personally adopt all the babies that would otherwise be aborted. By that same token, it’s only fair to ask if pro-choicers who oppose child abuse would be willing to personally adopt these children that might otherwise be abused. There is no relevant distinction.
Good for you. Now, let’s raise the stakes. What about infanticide? Do you oppose it? If so, how many newborns have you adopted – innocent babies that would otherwise have been put to death?
What about pet abuse? Do you oppose the drowning of helpless kittens? If so, how many of these kittens have you personally taken into your home?
Your statement amounts to saying, “Unless you are willing to personally care for these fetuses once they are born, we should feel free to go ahead and end their existence!” In effect, you are foisting all responsibility onto those who object to this heinous act. It is blame-shifting of the lowest caliber.
That’s certainly praiseworth, but I don’t follow - are you suggesting that it is wrong to rally against child abuse, or to make it a core issue for your vote?
But by that logic, abused children should be executed to prevent future abuse. And I can’t believe you would advocate that.
If someone wishes to force me to have a child, shouldn’t they have some responsibility for the quality of life of the child. Or is the concern only through the birth of the child? Does the actual child matter? If the child matters then some entity MUST take care of the child. The mother obviously can’t/won’t.
I’m saying that anti-abortionists should be willing to accept responsibility for the result of their stance.
I’ve heard some say that in cases of rape they would allow abortion. Are these somehow subhuman fetuses that are approved by the anti abortion lobby for discard? (I know this is not what I originally posted, but it just came to me)
I’m astonished that it took TWO pages for this canard to pop up…don’t we usually get the “If you were really pro life, you would would personally adopt all of these babies” on the first page of these threads, JThunder?
It just doesn’t seem like a real abortion thread if it doesn’t pop up in the first few posts.
I’m anxious to see the addition to his/her house that jali built to house all of the women who’ve been victims of domestic abuse as well…
I don’t believe in the execution of abused children - no!
The number of children in foster care now awaiting adoption is staggering. How many legal abortions ar completed in one year? Add those children to an already overburdened social service roll and what will be the result?
If I don’t want to have a child - I don’t understand how by forcing me to have the child in the end it would be a positive thing.
Most pro-life activists are hypocrites because they won’t take their views to their logically consistent conclusion. If abortion is murder there should be no exceptions; not for rape, or incest, or the health of the mother. Murder is murder. We would have to arrest women who had abortions, because they would be just as guilty as mothers who murder their born children. If they had children they would be taken away, because that’s what happens now to mothers who murder their children. Even attempting to obtain an abortion would have to lead to the same consequences. We would most certainly end up with the situation where a woman is raped and has an abortion but ultimately the rapist goes free and the victim goes to prison.
Does anyone really want to live in such a world? I’d be surprised if any but the most diehard pro-life activists would.
I must add: Child abuse, infanticide are horrible crimes.
I think the difference is interference with the right to choose. The person contemplating abortion obviously does not want a baby. WHAT ABOUT THE BABY? In my opinion child abuse and infanticide are a direct result of a “parent” not wanting the child. If you force an unwilling person to have a baby, do you not care what happens to the child?
I met a young man at a doctors office (I SWEAR THIS IS TRUE) in Forest Hills, Queens. He was an ex anti-choice person. His stance changed when his girlfriend got pregnant.
