Fifty Shades of Grey...another conversation about abortion

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from FaolanofEssex. Show FaolanofEssex's posts

    Re: Fifty Shades of Grey...another conversation about abortion

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:


    So if you simply repeat something over and over it must be true.  Stupid argument.  No one advocates abortion except as a choice.

    Are you pro-coathanger?  There is no pro-life there is only pro coathanger...  Just as stupid a statement.

     



    Stop hiding behind owellian doublespeak.

    Just what does "pro-choice" mean?  sometimes you are for abortion, sometimes you are against it?  Are you for the baby being involved in the "choice"?

    As a term, it just doesn't make sense.  You are either for something, or against it.  You also need to include all parties on the "choice" if it is truly a choice.

    It is never an informative label to say you are for what ever a 3rd party decides about aborting another 3rd party (i.e. pro-choice).  That's a non-position at best, at worst, you are for abortion as a possible outcome.  It is like saying I don't care if you get fat.  

     



    I think you are the Orwellian.  You lie about what the opposition to your views believe and just keep repeating it over and over.  You have both sides of the debate already marked out in ideological terms and simply disregard any evidence to the contrary. 

    Semantics aside.  The pro-choice people favor individual freedom.  You and other social conservatives favor state power.  You are a statist.

     



    Where am I lying?

    You are presenting a weak argument, so you accuse me of lying.  Please define pro-choice.  Show me how it is a valid term.

    You can't, because it means nothing. it is a term that defines a particular lukewarmedness about abortion at best.

    If you are pro-choice, by definition you are pro-abortion, because you don't oppose it.




    You are wrong. You can oppose something and still respect that others feel differently and make different decisions. Also, if you read the original posting, you must understand that they situation is not either/or. Nor is it as black and white as you attempt to paint it.



Funny.  I have a point of view, and I'm called hysterical.

you have a different point of view, and you are enlightened.

still, your argument is weak.  You are anti abortion yourself, but ok with someone being pro abortion, and that's your definition of pro choice?

That's just silly.




I am not calling you hysterical. I am simply stating you are wrong. No one finds the choice of abortion to be an optimal one. BUT it is not your choice to make. It is not even your personal business.

 
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Fifty Shades of Grey...another conversation about abortion

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:


    So if you simply repeat something over and over it must be true.  Stupid argument.  No one advocates abortion except as a choice.

    Are you pro-coathanger?  There is no pro-life there is only pro coathanger...  Just as stupid a statement.

     



    Stop hiding behind owellian doublespeak.

    Just what does "pro-choice" mean?  sometimes you are for abortion, sometimes you are against it?  Are you for the baby being involved in the "choice"?

    As a term, it just doesn't make sense.  You are either for something, or against it.  You also need to include all parties on the "choice" if it is truly a choice.

    It is never an informative label to say you are for what ever a 3rd party decides about aborting another 3rd party (i.e. pro-choice).  That's a non-position at best, at worst, you are for abortion as a possible outcome.  It is like saying I don't care if you get fat.  

     



    I think you are the Orwellian.  You lie about what the opposition to your views believe and just keep repeating it over and over.  You have both sides of the debate already marked out in ideological terms and simply disregard any evidence to the contrary. 

    Semantics aside.  The pro-choice people favor individual freedom.  You and other social conservatives favor state power.  You are a statist.

     



    Where am I lying?

    You are presenting a weak argument, so you accuse me of lying.  Please define pro-choice.  Show me how it is a valid term.

    You can't, because it means nothing. it is a term that defines a particular lukewarmedness about abortion at best.

    If you are pro-choice, by definition you are pro-abortion, because you don't oppose it.




    You are wrong. You can oppose something and still respect that others feel differently and make different decisions. Also, if you read the original posting, you must understand that they situation is not either/or. Nor is it as black and white as you attempt to paint it.



    Funny.  I have a point of view, and I'm called hysterical.

    you have a different point of view, and you are enlightened.

    still, your argument is weak.  You are anti abortion yourself, but ok with someone being pro abortion, and that's your definition of pro choice?

    That's just silly.




  • I am not calling you hysterical. I am simply stating you are wrong. No one finds the choice of abortion to be an optimal one. BUT it is not your choice to make. It is not even your personal business.



    So, what then is the definition of pro choice? You are putting forth that it is "non-of-you-business" definition.

    That doesn't indicate choice, but lack of a choice.  If it is "none-of-my-business" then, what "choice" do I have?

    Again, the true definiition seems to be pro abortion.

     
  • This post has been removed.

     
  • This post has been removed.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Fifty Shades of Grey...another conversation about abortion

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

      what then is the definition of pro choice?



    Skeeter doesn't realize that being pro-choice means you support the right to abortion as the Supreme Court laid out in Roe?

     


    Really?

     

     




    Apparently you have just a passing relationship with the English language.  Supporting Roe v. Wade makes you pro-abortion.

    Pro choice still means absolutely nothing.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Fifty Shades of Grey...another conversation about abortion

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

      Perfectly legit here, but ridiculous when the very same is used for, say, gun rights

     


    Oh enough with your silly political gotcha games.

    People concerned about gun control can certainly wring their hands over minor restrictions that nibble away at the right. However, that's a little foolish because as far as I can tell, lower courts are going further with the Heller decision.

    Heller dealt with a ban that made ownership for defense pointless. The other thread concerns a court striking a ban on concealed carry in light of Heller.

    The abortion tide is flowing in the other direction.



    Apparently the abortion tide is flowing in the direction of protecting babies, while the liberal legislators and courts are moving in the opposite direction.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from FaolanofEssex. Show FaolanofEssex's posts

    Re: Fifty Shades of Grey...another conversation about abortion

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    Supporting Roe v. Wade makes you pro-abortion.



    lol, no.

     



    No it does not. Do you have difficulty with concepts? A person can be opposed to the idea of having an abortion, yet still understand the right to personal privacy in the first trimester of pregnancy. If you are unable to comprehend that basic critical thought process, then really, you do not belong in the conversation. Back to the OP, do you think what happened to the woman was right? Just?

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Fifty Shades of Grey...another conversation about abortion

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    Supporting Roe v. Wade makes you pro-abortion.



    lol, no.

     



    No it does not. Do you have difficulty with concepts? A person can be opposed to the idea of having an abortion, yet still understand the right to personal privacy in the first trimester of pregnancy. If you are unable to comprehend that basic critical thought process, then really, you do not belong in the conversation. Back to the OP, do you think what happened to the woman was right? Just?



    Seems like you are the one having difficulty.  If you support the right of someone to have an abortion, that makes you pro abortion, does it not?

    I know you want to cling to the warm fuzziness of a non-descrptive phrase like pro-choice, but it means nothing.  The proper term is pro-abortion.

    If it is legal, and such a moral chocie, then why shy away from supporting it with the proper term?

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Fifty Shades of Grey...another conversation about abortion

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    Apparently the abortion tide is flowing in the direction of protecting babies, while the liberal legislators and courts are moving in the opposite direction.



    Well, that's where you are wrong. Restrictions on abortion and obstacles designed to discourage abortions often get upheld. That shrinks the right. That's why people who agree with Roeare right to worry.

     


    On on the other hand, courts have been actively striking laws restricting various aspects of gun ownership. That expands the right. That's why people who worry about government "outlawing guns" or anything remotely close are fools.



    shrinking rights.  So, that brings me back to MY orgiginal question:  When do the rights for the baby begin?

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Fifty Shades of Grey...another conversation about abortion

    I'm not surprised that the pro-abortionists are completely unwilling to stand behind proper terms and remain totally silent on the rights of the baby.  It is like they actually think that abortion presents some sort of moral hazzard, and need to maintain an arms-length relationship from actually having an opinion they can stand behind.  So far all I get is that they have no particular opinion, but it is ok if someone else wants to do it.  That to me is a non-answer.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Fifty Shades of Grey...another conversation about abortion

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    Apparently the abortion tide is flowing in the direction of protecting babies, while the liberal legislators and courts are moving in the opposite direction.



    Well, that's where you are wrong. Restrictions on abortion and obstacles designed to discourage abortions often get upheld. That shrinks the right. That's why people who agree with Roeare right to worry.

     


    On on the other hand, courts have been actively striking laws restricting various aspects of gun ownership. That expands the right. That's why people who worry about government "outlawing guns" or anything remotely close are fools.



    shrinking rights.  So, that brings me back to MY orgiginal question:  When do the rights for the baby begin?



    Asked and answered.  You just don't like the answer.

    Now you can answer a question: Would you force a rape victim to give birth to the rapist's child?

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Fifty Shades of Grey...another conversation about abortion

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    So, that brings me back to MY orgiginal question:  When do the rights for the baby begin?



    LOL.

     

    Refusing to accept the answers to your questions and endlessly repeating the question does not an argument win.

     

     

     

    Pro-choice is accurate because there are indeed plenty of people who would never get abortion, don't like the idea of it, but place the rights of the individual above the power of government.

    And Roe did provide the best answer to your question that man is capable of.

     

     

     

     

    Face it: You're just frustrated that as time goes on, more and more people discover that they have the intelligence and character to lead wise, moral, and balanced lives on their own.....

    ....and don't need to seek shelter in what a man claims other men claimed an invisible man told them was universal law, between two and eight thousand years ago.



    Keeping in mind that believers disagree about what that "law" actually means...  Even Skeeter does not accept all the laws of the Bible.  He picks and chooses based on his moral understanding of the underlying truth.  He makes choices...

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from FaolanofEssex. Show FaolanofEssex's posts

    Re: Fifty Shades of Grey...another conversation about abortion

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    Supporting Roe v. Wade makes you pro-abortion.



    lol, no.

     



    No it does not. Do you have difficulty with concepts? A person can be opposed to the idea of having an abortion, yet still understand the right to personal privacy in the first trimester of pregnancy. If you are unable to comprehend that basic critical thought process, then really, you do not belong in the conversation. Back to the OP, do you think what happened to the woman was right? Just?



    Seems like you are the one having difficulty.  If you support the right of someone to have an abortion, that makes you pro abortion, does it not?

    I know you want to cling to the warm fuzziness of a non-descrptive phrase like pro-choice, but it means nothing.  The proper term is pro-abortion.

    If it is legal, and such a moral chocie, then why shy away from supporting it with the proper term?




    Your evading my question. Do you think what happened to this woman is moral and just?

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Fifty Shades of Grey...another conversation about abortion

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    Supporting Roe v. Wade makes you pro-abortion.



    lol, no.

     



    No it does not. Do you have difficulty with concepts? A person can be opposed to the idea of having an abortion, yet still understand the right to personal privacy in the first trimester of pregnancy. If you are unable to comprehend that basic critical thought process, then really, you do not belong in the conversation. Back to the OP, do you think what happened to the woman was right? Just?



    Seems like you are the one having difficulty.  If you support the right of someone to have an abortion, that makes you pro abortion, does it not?

    I know you want to cling to the warm fuzziness of a non-descrptive phrase like pro-choice, but it means nothing.  The proper term is pro-abortion.

    If it is legal, and such a moral chocie, then why shy away from supporting it with the proper term?




    Your evading my question. Do you think what happened to this woman is moral and just?




    Not evading, your not asking as faras I can see. Your question, to the extent I can see one, was answered in my first post.  As if Ireland law has any application in the U.S.

    Are you willing to admit that pro choice has no meaning, and that if you are for someone else having access to abortion, you are pro-abortion?

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Fifty Shades of Grey...another conversation about abortion

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    Apparently the abortion tide is flowing in the direction of protecting babies, while the liberal legislators and courts are moving in the opposite direction.



    Well, that's where you are wrong. Restrictions on abortion and obstacles designed to discourage abortions often get upheld. That shrinks the right. That's why people who agree with Roeare right to worry.

     


    On on the other hand, courts have been actively striking laws restricting various aspects of gun ownership. That expands the right. That's why people who worry about government "outlawing guns" or anything remotely close are fools.



    shrinking rights.  So, that brings me back to MY orgiginal question:  When do the rights for the baby begin?



    Asked and answered.  You just don't like the answer.

    Now you can answer a question: Would you force a rape victim to give birth to the rapist's child?



    You answered?  Was that one of your cryptic answers that is so nonsensical one cannot make heads or tails out of it?  the only thing I got out of your answer is that the baby never has rights.  That's sad.  Such a low bar for a creation of god.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Fifty Shades of Grey...another conversation about abortion

    [/QUOTE]


    Asked and answered.  You just don't like the answer.

    Now you can answer a question: Would you force a rape victim to give birth to the rapist's child?

    [/QUOTE]

    You answered?  Was that one of your cryptic answers that is so nonsensical one cannot make heads or tails out of it?  the only thing I got out of your answer is that the baby never has rights.  That's sad.  Such a low bar for a creation of god.

    [/QUOTE]

    Stop it.  You ignore all the answers given to you that conflict with your your preconceived truth.  That does not mean they were not given,  You just don't like them.  Try actually thinking about what the other side has to say.  Try thinking.

    Besides answers you also avoid questions.  Would you force a rape victim to bear the rapist's child?  

     
  • This post has been removed.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Fifty Shades of Grey...another conversation about abortion

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Stop it.  You ignore all the answers given to you that conflict with your your preconceived truth.  That does not mean they were not given,  You just don't like them.  Try actually thinking about what the other side has to say.  Try thinking.

    Besides answers you also avoid questions.  Would you force a rape victim to bear the rapist's child?  

    [/QUOTE]

    I guess this writer wonders... Would you?

    [/QUOTE]

    I believe in freedom of choice regardless of the cause of the pregnancy.  

    The point is that many conservatives allow for an exception in the case of rape so they are partly pro-choice on the topic.  They just want to choose the choices available for others.  And that is hypocritical nonsense if you view the fetus as a human being with full rights.

    Do you think a woman should bear her rapist's child?

     
  • Sections
    Shortcuts

    Share