Another interesting pro-lifer conundrum.

[beenthere]

canndo:

 

[canndo]

canndo:

You mistake information and debate with whining. Isn't it you that whines about:

Taxes
The poor
Bengazi
Health care
Presidential actions
Socialism
The liberal media
welfare
regulations
government intrusion
gun control
Obama in general
polls

 

[desert dude]

My point is simple. (my errors are from my phone primarily, and as you know I do not spell well). If the "pro-life" faction were actually pro life, they would be concerned over the poisons in the environment that tend highly to endanger the life and health of that very "child" they seek to "save". If they were truely pro life they would at least show some outrage over the poisons that the mother is forced to ingest and thus pass on to her fetus - that thing they profess to be so concerned over.

I said nothing about other "innocent things".

You think that a total of 238 foreign chemicals in a human fetus is just enviro-wacko nonsense do you? They have found benzene in fetal blood of over 1 part per million, DDD, DDT (in children in the upper and lower latitudes), and hundreds of other chemicals. What would a pro-lifer say to a mother who drinks excessively? Smokes tobacco? smokes crack? but not a word about all these other things. If they were as concerned as they claim, they would be fighting to preserve the life and future of the unborn, yet they are not.


Why?

1. Cite your source for all these poor, poisoned babies. I am skeptical. Frankly, you have a pretty poor track record with issues of science.
2. You seem to be implying that the pro-choice crowd, I am in that crowd, have the moral high ground on the issue of the environment. Total self-absorbed non-sense.
3. You have deluded yourself into believing that because you have a case of the vapors over "poisons in the environment" and "GMO crops cause cancer in lab mice" that everybody else should follow along and join in your superstitions. Wagging your finger at everybody is a poor debating tactic.

 

[BigNBushy]

So we could show our children what death looks like? Would that be by the lb?

No, I imagine most women get abortions because of their inability to keep the child. If they could financially gain from the experience, the baby need not die. Parents seeking adoption already pay a lot of money for the privilege to adopt a child. Of all the people involved that profit, the birth mother isn't one of them, and she is doing all the work. Adoption agencies charge out the wazoo.

Of course, certain babies would be worth more than others. That's just how free markets work. But why should the birth mother be the only person who does not get money out of the arangement?

 

[Antidisestablishmentarian]

Lots of people with kids have ended the lives of the unborn. This perspective earns no merit with pro lifers, as again, its still murder to us, regardless is you really love the ones you decided to keep.

If that's how you want to look at people who have kids, then I feel bad for ya.

 

[Antidisestablishmentarian]

The law has decided abortions are not murder so...

Yes there are illegal abortions performed.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Think it? I see ample evidence of it, including my initial opening statement on this thread. The obligation a pro-lifer believes he owes to a child ends at birth.

Says you, dipshit. You and god can fuck off. God doesn't make morality.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Funny how the sanctity of life does not apply to the death penalty. How many pro-lifers here are anti capital punishment?

pro-life, anti-capital punishment for all animals, even humans, and anti-god. I'm also an environmentalist who knows global warming is a scam to line rich people's pockets. Mooch.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

They make the presumption that a government they dispise, one that can't possibly do anything right, one that is fraught with indulgence, and populated with fools, in this case is ALWAYS right and that anyone who is convicted by that same inept government must surely be guilty and deserve to be killed.

The government's role is to protect its citizens from harm, not intimidate them with murder. The US is the only non-Asian first world country which still practices the barbaric practice.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

It is not a huge stretch from aborting the unwanted unborn to ending the lives of the unwanted living. It is simply getting people with this sort of mindset to rationalize the acceptance of a narrower spectrum of what constitutes life.

Will we define life by God’s standards or pagan standards? Mandatory, government healthcare sets the stage for pagan practices.

Art Thompson is CEO of The John Birch Society.

Then why does a woman on the way to an abortion clinic to abort her baby, if murdered on the way, count as a double homicide, for the "baby" and mother? You can't have it both ways. The baby either is or isn't a baby. Dumb ass.

 

[twostrokenut]

So is it actually a person? I mean from the moment of conception, is it a person? and thus, in this country a U.S. citizen?

How is it you know you must be a person to be a us citizen....and think these contractual status' could apply to a being that has no capacity to contract?

 

[Canna Sylvan]

You know, now that I think about it, this whole thread is a complete failure in logic. Actions that are wrong, don't become right just because some other action is also wrong. If we allow that to happen, then all manner of wrongs can be done if we work at making a few wrongs possible for the side effect of others. Sometimes you have to do things. This isn't one of them. The OP is against polluting the world, which I'm against also. But that doesn't justify killing a innocent baby because you can warp it into meaning that it's wrong to allow a baby to live in a polluted world.

This kind of logic will create a mindset that its ok to pollute just enough to allow abortions, if you are so very much pro-death, you'll justify going against your morals.

Which is exactly what happens with religion, and why I hate it. "Well, gays and heathens aren't really bothering me, but I don't want to go to hell, so fuck them!" .... "Well, I don't really have an opinion of abortion one way or the other, but if I can pollute more and it keeps abortion around, show me the money!"

 

[canndo]

1. Cite your source for all these poor, poisoned babies. I am skeptical. Frankly, you have a pretty poor track record with issues of science.
2. You seem to be implying that the pro-choice crowd, I am in that crowd, have the moral high ground on the issue of the environment. Total self-absorbed non-sense.
3. You have deluded yourself into believing that because you have a case of the vapors over "poisons in the environment" and "GMO crops cause cancer in lab mice" that everybody else should follow along and join in your superstitions. Wagging your finger at everybody is a poor debating tactic.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/newborn-babies-chemicals-exposure-bpa/

I don't really have as much of a problem with science as you portray. I believe you are talking exclusively about the Seralini study, which, it seems now, is being vindicated anyway.

Nor am i say we have a higher moral standing, I am saying that my statement tends to lead us to believe that the pro-life crowd is more in favor of control for its own sake than for the "rights" of fetuses". You seem to maintain that the introduction of hundreds of foreign chemicals must surely be benign and I must be a crackpot but history shows over and over again that these foreign chemicals are indeed deleterious to one's health as cancer clusters clearly show. Are those crack pot observations as well? Are the evacuaton of superfund sites simply a waste of time because people like me have these superstitions?

 

[canndo]

Says you, dipshit. You and god can fuck off. God doesn't make morality.

Easy enough to demonstrate. Enforce birth at every occasion but cut out all programs that prop up poor moms. I don't know how much clearer it can be.

 

[canndo]

You know, now that I think about it, this whole thread is a complete failure in logic. Actions that are wrong, don't become right just because some other action is also wrong. If we allow that to happen, then all manner of wrongs can be done if we work at making a few wrongs possible for the side effect of others. Sometimes you have to do things. This isn't one of them. The OP is against polluting the world, which I'm against also. But that doesn't justify killing a innocent baby because you can warp it into meaning that it's wrong to allow a baby to live in a polluted world.

This kind of logic will create a mindset that its ok to pollute just enough to allow abortions, if you are so very much pro-death, you'll justify going against your morals.

Which is exactly what happens with religion, and why I hate it. "Well, gays and heathens aren't really bothering me, but I don't want to go to hell, so fuck them!" .... "Well, I don't really have an opinion of abortion one way or the other, but if I can pollute more and it keeps abortion around, show me the money!"

The problem is that what you state is not my "logic". I simply said that if anti-abortionists truely had the fetus as it's most important object, then it would fight just as hard to keep that fetus from being poisoned as it would from it being killed in any other way. I am not claiming that we should promote abortions because of pollution.

 

[spandy]

You know, now that I think about it, this whole thread is a complete failure in logic. Actions that are wrong, don't become right just because some other action is also wrong. If we allow that to happen, then all manner of wrongs can be done if we work at making a few wrongs possible for the side effect of others. Sometimes you have to do things. This isn't one of them. The OP is against polluting the world, which I'm against also. But that doesn't justify killing a innocent baby because you can warp it into meaning that it's wrong to allow a baby to live in a polluted world.

This kind of logic will create a mindset that its ok to pollute just enough to allow abortions, if you are so very much pro-death, you'll justify going against your morals.

Which is exactly what happens with religion, and why I hate it. "Well, gays and heathens aren't really bothering me, but I don't want to go to hell, so fuck them!" .... "Well, I don't really have an opinion of abortion one way or the other, but if I can pollute more and it keeps abortion around, show me the money!"

I agree with your entire post, 'cept.....

You hate religion because many believers take it upon themselves with zero authority to look down on gays and heathens?

Sounds like you hate assholes, not religion. I hate assholes too, and although the book I read from does say that certain things are sins, it also says that all sins are on the level and no where does it give me authority to judge. So if I looked at my neighbor's wife's ass, that would be the same level of sin as two dudes fucking...it aint my place to say a damn word or even have an opinion, so I don't, in fact I couldn't care less.

It means about as much to me as seeing someone put ketchup on a hotdog, I think it's gross and would never do it, but I dont think less of them just because I prefer mustard.

You on the other hand think it's religions fault, when really it's just people.

 

[twostrokenut]

Easy enough to demonstrate. Enforce birth at every occasion but cut out all programs that prop up poor moms. I don't know how much clearer it can be.

How would that not promote responsibility?
Iirc germans have beer vending machines....but very tough dui penalties.

Most are jaded against those programs because of the idolized abuse of them....there is a growing cultural trend towards this.

Ever hear a 13 year old girl when asked "why didn't you do your homework?"
Respond "I don't have to do anything you say all I have to do is get pregnant"?

 

[UncleBuck]

the book I read from does say that certain things are sins, it also says that all sins are on the level and no where does it give me authority to judge. So if I looked at my neighbor's wife's ass, that would be the same level of sin as two dudes fucking...

imagine that, the dumb racist is also a bigoted bible thumper. never would have seen that one coming!

 

[canndo]

How would that not promote responsibility?
Iirc germans have beer vending machines....but very tough dui penalties.

Most are jaded against those programs because of the idolized abuse of them....there is a growing cultural trend towards this.

Ever hear a 13 year old girl when asked "why didn't you do your homework?"
Respond "I don't have to do anything you say all I have to do is get pregnant"?

It gets tricky now. If for some reason it did NOT do as you say, a child is in trouble - and of course the state must step in. So either it steps in and enforces a pregnancy to term, or it steps in to protect and possibly rear the child.

Many pro-lifers actually see the child as "punishment" for fornication, this sort of seems to be the case here. "you should grow up little girl, and here is just the way to do it".

 

[spandy]

imagine that, the dumb racist is also a bigoted bible thumper. never would have seen that one coming!

Your post was exactly what I expected from you.