What are your views on abortion?

Discussion in 'Abortion' started by Daggdag, Oct 19, 2020.

?

Which best describes your view on abortion

  1. A woman has the right to choose to get an abortion with no limitations.

    41 vote(s)
    47.7%
  2. Abortion should be illegal after the first trimester

    16 vote(s)
    18.6%
  3. Abortion should be illegal except to preserve the health and life of the mother.

    24 vote(s)
    27.9%
  4. Abortion should be illegal in all circumstances.

    5 vote(s)
    5.8%
  1. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This could not possibly be more irrelevant to the OP.
     
  2. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wow!! Now you flipped to handing out abortions like candy!!
     
    Ritter likes this.
  3. Ritter

    Ritter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2015
    Messages:
    8,944
    Likes Received:
    3,018
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No, it is a loaded question fallacy - If I answer no, you will say "exactly, so abortion is wrong" and if I say yes, I am fine with murder. You should stop copy-pasting it and move on because no one is interested in aswering it again (yes, we have all answered it at least once).

    It is a garbage question.

    Give up.


    Where.

    Give up.


    Give up.

    Which is a right.
     
  4. Ritter

    Ritter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2015
    Messages:
    8,944
    Likes Received:
    3,018
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Only one who fears anything here is you.
     
  5. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This would still have the government ordering the rape or incest victim to carry the baby to term or face consequences from the government as well as the assault.

    Are you REALLY ready to send rape victims to prison?
     
  6. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Under Obama, the Senate and the House assembled bipartisan committees to address immigration reform.

    Those committees created the comprehensive immigration reform bill of 2013. It was backed by Rubio, McCain and other Republicans as well as a good number of Democrats and it passed the Senate. In the House, Republican Speaker Boehner blocked it.

    That bill addressed pretty much ALL the issues of immigration. It was backed by the US Chamber of Commerce.

    What has happened since then is the emergence of white supremacy, with immigration being used as a political wedge issue with ABSOLUTELY NO interest in resolving ANY of the immigration issues.

    The same has happened with abortion. For years abortion has been used as a wedge issue for Republicans promising harsh law against women to curry favor with the religious right - even though more than 75% of America wants abortion to be legal.

    That's why we're discussing this even TODAY.

    This issue has NOTHING to do with reducing the number of abortions. The issue has to do with LAWS against women that certain religious denominations require, thus ensuring the issue is political.

    If the issue were one of reducing the number of abortions, there would be ALL SORTS of ways for working TOGETHER on this issue, but religious groups REFUSE and ENSURE this is pure politics.

    You are part of that problem.


    On BOTH these issues, what has been happening really is disgusting. I agree with you on that.
     
  7. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What the heck are you talking about?

    Custody IS up to the parents today. They can lose that right, but it is theirs to lose.
     
  8. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You're fudging again.

    "A human" is a person. We have laws on persons that derive from our constitution, which refers to persons.

    "Human" refers to whether tissue is of our species. That can be determined by microscope. It includes my little toe, a skin cell, a bone fragment, etc.

    If I thought there was any question about whether a family member or any other person was alive, I would start CPR and call 911.
     
  9. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Help me (and others reading) follow this, what was the original question?

    I tried to follow the chain of quotes back (like 10 different quotes) but eventually it stopped working. (Ritter didn't properly quote your post at one point)

    When a thread goes on this long, it can be hard to follow a specific dialogue.
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2021
  10. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Having our own little private definitions is an absolutely absurd direction.

    The issues here require the paricipation of states and countries - not some PF thread.

    So, no, I' reject your new terminology. There is absolutely NO justification for changing to terminology not shared by medical science, our government, and the population as a whole.
    If you can't make your argument without inventing new terminology, then you are going to fail at communication.

    The nation is not ready for YOU to establish new terminology to replace what is being used today.
     
  11. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I still think that's somewhat of a false flag.

    There are pro-life atheists you know.

    And you saying "religion" implies this is all based on silly non-rational logic, rather than logical ethics.
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2021
  12. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yeah, but how much could abortions realistically be reduced, with that approach?


    I'm even going to have to side with conservatives on this and say that criminalization of drugs probably substantially reduces the abortion rate from what it would otherwise be.
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2021
  13. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    To the best of my knowledge, the question was never stated using terminology used in medical science, religion, or government concerning this topic.

    Thus when answers were given using terminology we all use, he simply declared it as not an answer!

    Thus the first question that has to be answered is just a matter of whether we can go ahead and use the terminology that EVERYONE is using.

    Or, does America need to switch to new terminology invented by a poster on a PF thread.

    That seems like an easy question to me. And, there is only one answer I'm willing to accept.
     
  14. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If the objective were to reduce the number of abortions, then there would not be a focus on ONE method of doing so, especially since there really isn't any evidence that the one method is effective. We KNOW Canada does better at reducing abortions with ZERO laws on abortion and even by PAYING for abortions.

    You can NOT claim that laws are effective. And, you can NOT claim that laws are even the only approach.

    I'd like to see fewer abortions and I'm an atheist. HOWEVER, I do NOT accept your "pro-life" label, because that label is a TOTAL perversion derived by politicians and religious zealots set on only one solution - a solution that is NOT acceptable.


    There is NO QUESTION that the arguments made here concerning using government to force women include arguments that are ABSOLUTELY ridiculous.

    I don't accept that "logical ethics" requires government to get involved in the very personal and totally private health care decisions of women.

    Government does NOT know the issues faced by every woman who ever got pregnant. Suggesting that "logical ethics" can lead to there being absolutely ZERO reasons for abortion is umbelievably ridiculous. And, it's even MORE ludicrous to suggest that government has the right answer for all pregnancies.
     
  15. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We've discussed this before.
    If you adjust for race, the majority of that difference goes away.
    And the laws for most abortions aren't that different in Canada than they are in the US.

    It's also colder in Canada, so who knows, maybe people are out and about less. (wear more clothing, less skin revealed... maybe the muslims were on to something?)
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2021
  16. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You cannot claim that they're not.


    Most of the serious laws in the US on abortion have been circumvented by the courts.
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2021
  17. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Okay, well forget about the 10th week. What about when it's ACTUALLY the end of the term?
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2021
  18. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When did I claim to be pro life ?
    What if I simply claim to be pro-justice and pro- human rights of citizens (including the unborn) ?

    "Pro-life" is only one aspect of this.
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2021
  19. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You REFUSE to even look into this!

    Take a look at Canada and other countries.

    Take a look at America when it had the laws YOU want, that drove back ally coat hangar abortions for the not wealthy and trips abroad by the wealthy.

    Yet, you claim YOUR way is "success"???

    If what you want is to reduce abortions, you could look at the studies of why women choose abortion and start reducing those issues. You could look at data regarding how women who want abortions became pregnant in the first place and start working on that. You could ensure the universle and easy availability of solutions such as RU486, preventing a fetus from ever existing.

    But, no. That requires work. You want to just sit back and think you have done your job by brining down the weight of the government on women.

    I'm sorry, I just see that as profoundly disgusting, cruel and thoughtless. I'm not arguing with your objective of lower abortion rate,. BUT, your chosen methodology is an abomination.
     
  20. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I've already discussed Canada with you.
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2021
  21. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You do realize that abortions were still probably much lower then?
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2021
  22. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Please reread my post.

    I said I don't accept your pro-life label - even though I would do work to reduce abortions and I'm an atheist.

    And, you can not bring the governent down on women, taking away choice on very personal health issues on pain of prosecution and then say you favor human rights of citizens.

    That's not even funny.
     
  23. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How about if we tried your way for one year, and saw how much it actually reduced the abortion rate, and then we could decide if my idea was better?
     
  24. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You can't make it go away, regardless of anything you say.

    Look at a map. Canada is still where it always has been.

    Read their law. They pay for abortions, all of which are legal.

    Look up their abortion rate.
     
  25. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We are weighing the woman's right to avoid several months of pregnancy, to the unborn child's right to life.
     

Share This Page