~ MOD ALERT ~ Why is Pro-Life seen as Anti-Woman?

I have two questions for you.

1-If abortions aren't immoral, then why are you so in favor of reducing them?

2-How does sex education and contraception violate religious teachings? I don't get some of those pro-lifers. According to the bible, premarital sex is sinful, however, the act of somebody using birth control in and of itself is not sinful.

 

I have never claimed they are moral or immoral and why wouldn't someone be in favor of reducing them .. don't fall into the trap of thinking that being pro-choice is being pro-abortion, the only difference between pro-life and pro-choice is how to achieve the same result .. pro-lifers want to do it via legislation (already proven not to work) where as pro-choicers want to do it via education and contraception (already proven to work).

The abolition of abortion is only a part of what pro-lifers are aiming for, their goal, whether some of them realize it or not, is a form of theocracy .. honestly Sam do you really think that most pro-lifers will stop IF they get abortion made illegal, sex education and contraception are already under attack by them, next it will be sex before marriage.

Because many pro-lifers believe that sex before marriage is a sin and that sex should only be for procreation and nothing else.
Point of fact premarital sex was only a sin for a woman and not a man.

 

Yes, I know that already. However, what does that have anything to do with the question which I had asked you (about birth control)?

 

BTW, for those needing FURTHER proof of the misogyny ....go to Fugazi's "Mortality Rate" thread.

 

I don't hate women. What makes you think that I hate women?

 

Because they believe that contraception and sex education promote premarital sex, which they don't.

In fact numerous studies have found that when teenagers are given comprehensive sex education they delay their first sexual experience and far far more likely to use contraception when they do indulge in sex.

where as abstinence programs have been shown to be totally ineffective.

Source - http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/1487

The relevant studies can all be found at the bottom of the article

 

The fact you agreed with Unifier on Fugazi's thread. Simple as that.

 

Take it into context, dude. Unifer's comment was directed at women that have abortions-not at all women in general.

 

I don't think most abortion clinics have women's best interests at heart either...



- - - Updated - - -

I don't think most abortion clinics have women's best interests at heart either...



- - - Updated - - -

I don't think most abortion clinics have women's best interests at heart either...



- - - Updated - - -

I don't think most abortion clinics have women's best interests at heart either...

 

And he gleefully imagined their DEATHS.

 

We don't try to paint pro-lifers as "anti-woman" - they do that themselves. We just point it out, but it seems, most of them still don't see it.

 

Please answer this question. Was his comment directed at women in general?

And nope. I never said that I gleefully imagine women dying in unsafe abortions. Why are you lying and putting words in my mouth?

 

But you did agree with his comment, and regardless if that comment was aimed at just women who have abortions it is still disgusting .. have you ever seen a pro-choicer actually declare that they "couldn't careless about the fetus", yet here we have a pro-lifer saying they couldn't careless about the women, a comment you agreed with.

 

Where did I say he was misogynistic?

I thought it was about equal rights not the fetus being "more important than the woman who has an abortion".

What you believe is not confirmed by the numerous amounts of research, in fact the complete opposite is true, so why would you ignore the research and evidence?

You still don't get it do you, for every illegal abortion done where the woman dies the zef dies as well .. how is that protecting the zef. It would seem that in your estimation that the death of two is better than the death of one .. why is that?

 

It is expected that 43% of all women will have an abortion. If you don't care about the lives of 43% of all women, you could be said to be a misogynist.

Saying a fetus is more important than a woman is a misogynist statement. You cannot maintain credibility by making misogynist statements while denying being one. The government can pass laws until the cows come home, but the government cannot protect fetuses. Only a pregnant woman can do that, and the government just cannot force her to do that no matter how many laws they pass. Believe whatever you like, but when you continue to believe something in the face of contradicting evidence, it destroys your credibility.

 

1-I don't believe that statistic.
2-Banning abortions reduces abortion rates (according to you, it doesnt, but lets just say for the sake of this arguement that it does), but it would increase the death rates from illegal abortions. Are you saying that I am a misogynist because I care about protecting fetuses? I believe that a fetus is a person. Should laws be made to protect unborn children, or the women trying to harm them? What do you expect me to believe? Make laws which will increase abortion rates, just to protect the people trying to harm unborn children I know that you don't believe that the unborn are persons or children, but I believe that.

We aren't debating who's right or wrong. We aren't debating whether or not the fetus is a person. We are arguing about whether or not I am a misogynist. You can disagree with me about the personhood of the fetus all you want, but it's totally false that I hate women.

What if gender roles were reversed, and men could get pregnant? Would I be "man-hater", or a "misandrist" for wanting to ban abortions?

Nope. That's because of political correctness. Feminists hold men to different standards than women. it's not sexist if you say something about a man, but god forbid you say that same thing about a woman. Double standards. Feminists believe that women are superior to men.

 

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0904509.html
An estimated 43% of women will have at least one abortion by the time they are 45 years old

http://www.aclupa.org/education/cla...tresourcespubl/womenwhohaveabortionsinpat.htm

The picture that emerges from national statistics about who becomes pregnant and who has abortions, is different from public perceptions and media images. According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, half of all pregnancies in the US are unintended, and half of these (about 1/4 of all pregnancies) end in abortion. It is estimated that 43% of US women will have an abortion by the time they are forty-five years old.

I'm saying you're a misogynist because you don't care about women. Laws have little or no effect on the abortion rate. They only effect how safe they are. If you don't base your beliefs on FACTS, you can't expect people to care what you believe.

There's an old saying: "What you are thunders so loudly in my ear, that I cannot hear what you say you are.

More misogynistic statements.

 

If gender roles were reversed and men got pregnant instead of women, would you accuse me of misandry, because of my pro-life views?

 

If you have no regard for the well-being of men, then yes, you would be a misandrist.

 

I think the word play on whether it is alive or not is a pretty dull agument. Whether it is alive or not, we know it is a developing person, so the question will always be do we terminate a life so pretending like it isn't a living thing or a thing developing into a living person isn't really going to help. But the question is also do we force a woman against her will to carry through with an abortion.

On the one-hand you have people who declare the right of a woman to terminate the child if she is not prepared to concieve. On the other hand, you have people who want the government to come in on their behalf and force one of the deepest invasions of a person I can think of and force a woman, by law, to carry through with a pregnancy, regardless of her wishes. How is the morality of one any better than the other?

 

I am pro-life. You are pro-choice. I believe that unborn humans are persons. You don't. And I'm asking you to understand, not agree, with my opinions. If I believe that unborn humans are innocent children, why would you expect me to support laws which care more about the people trying to harm them, rather than the unborn themselves? For me to agree with your beliefs about abortion, that would be very hypocritical and inconsistent.

 

It's not 'anti-women', because that would be implying that men can't get pregnant - when a transgendered man (pre-op) can indeed get pregnant, not to mention some men are born hermaphrodites with a completely functioning uterus.

Claiming it's 'anti-women' is essentially discriminating against those minorities.

 

the vast majority of the female population is not transgender.

 

Therefore that minority doesn't matter, got it