Why do "pro-lifers" constantly claim they wouldn't ban contraception...

yet constantly declare that there must be "consequences for having sex" as a reason they oppose abortion?

Or do they not think we notice?

 

I do not believe there must be consequences of having sex. I can't speak for other pro-lifers, but if two people have premarital sex, do I hope they get pregnant or have an STD to "suffer the consequences of their actions"? OF COURSE NOT! I don't condone or approve of their actions, but I NEVER WISH BAD UPON ANYBODY! If a couple wants to use contraception, I don't think that should be illegal. That's nobody's business but their own.

When I say that "women shouldn't kill their unborn children because they don't like the natural consequences of sex", ALL THAT MEANS is that I RESPECT THE LIFE OF THE CHILD. The woman created it, and she has the responsibility to care for it. Not treat it like trash for convenience reasons. She (and/or her boyfriend) should have just used contraception. Yes, people use contraception to avoid the natural consequences of sex. and I have ZERO PROBLEM with that. Don't you get it? If people want to use contraception to avoid the biological consequences of sex, that's their business, and I don't have a problem with it!

All I'm saying is that the life of the unborn child is WAY more important than the woman's sex life.

I don't support banning contraception. People should have the right to avoid the biological consequences of sex. Pro-lifers who want to ban contraception (with some exceptions, of course) are jerks who care more about punishing women than about reducing abortion rates. Some pro-lifers are against contraception because they believe it does increase abortion rates. They are misinformed, not jerks. But pro-lifers who want to ban contraception (knowing very well that it reduces abortion rates) are jerks, because they want to see women get unwanted pregnancies and suffer.

However, women shouldn't whine about "I don't feel like having a baby, abortion is my natural right, bla bla bla", since it's her own fault that she's pregnant in the first place.

 

Is it, so if a woman (& man) take precautions its still the woman's fault she got pregnant, despite the fact that by taking precautions they both have expressed the decision NOT to become pregnant.

and again I need to remind you that consent to sex is not consent to injury.

 

That's irrelevant. All I'm trying to say is this.

Gorn Captain is yet another example of pro-choicers putting words into the mouths of pro-lifers. He accuses me of wanting to punish women for sex.

 

Sam? Do you realize you just compared getting pregnant...to getting a sexually transmitted disease and said it was a "bad thing"???

 

Yes, of course having an unwanted pregnancy is a bad thing. I don't get what you're trying to say.

 

Did I mention YOU, Sam? 1. YOU are putting words in MY mouth. 2. I have GlobalCitizen saying exactly what I posted-

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=326511&page=5

- - - Updated - - -

It is??? So should people try to rectify it, fix it, when something bad is occuring to them? Or just let the bad thing keep happening?

 

Well some of your comments allude to that very thing, such as calling them sluts, or trash, or supporting laws that would force a female to remain pregnant against her will.

 

Yes. That's because I care about the life of the unborn child, not because I am motivated by a desire to punish women for their "immoral behavior".

 

So in effect by supporting those laws you are trying to create a law that punishes a woman for sex .. regardless of the intent of caring about the fetus, an anti-abortion law is paramount to punishment for sex.

 

Boo-hoo. Cry me a river. Having a baby is so inconvenient. It's punishment.

 

So as expected you resort to your standard responses which have the usual anal worth.

 

Do you believe this?

 

According to you, women should have the right to abort unborn babies, just so they can spend more time with their friends at parties, rather than spend time with their child as parents. And making it illegal for women to kill children for convenience is "punishment".

 

Why do you keep lying about what I say?

Link to where I say anything like "women should have the right to abort unborn babies, just so they can spend more time with their friends at parties"

 

I have no idea what you are asking. Or saying. can you clarify? Heck....I'm not for banning birth control. I use it. Who says they want to ban birth control?

 

You never said that.

But that's one common reason why women (mainly teenagers and women in their twenties) have abortions.

 

You said I did -

Show me the stats that say that a reason for a woman getting an abortion is " just so they can spend more time with their friends at parties"

 

Show me the stats first.

 

Your assertion you provide the proof.

Are you know admitting that you made an incorrect statement when you said that I said "According to you, women should have the right to abort unborn babies, just so they can spend more time with their friends at parties, rather than spend time with their child as parents. And making it illegal for women to kill children for convenience is "punishment". "

 

I didn't mean it literally. I meant they wanted to live carefree lives.

 

So it was an emotional statement then?

So show me the stats that state they want to live a "carefree" life?

 

That they say that...or that sex "should have consquences"?

- - - Updated - - -

So you call women "sluts" out of your concern for the unborn???

 

"Pro-lifers" who say they oppose the idea of "sex without consequences". IOW, that they want women to risk getting pregnant every time they have sex so they suffer a "consquence"...like pregnancy.

Which means going after contraception, not just abortion. Go back...re-read what "Global Citizen" wrote that I quoted

 

Fugazi, have you noticed a pattern with Sam?

He accuses pro-chocers of "saying things" ....then cannot provide quotes of them saying it.

Then he bemoans how we accuse him of saying things or denies saying them....and we PROVIDE quotes of him saying them....and he tries to change the subject or says "Well, that's not what I meant" or "I get nervous when I'm debating".

Remember that general comment I've made about how dishonesty runs rampant through the "pro-life" agenda....how often they are disengenuous or even lie. Well....it obviously starts at an early age.