The Abortion Thread

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
961

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:
An abortion is a single event, to be pro-abortion you are in favor of it in 1 particular case. Since there are apparently millions of these you cannot have an opinion on each individual case without knowing all the facts. This is why the term pro choice is used so the person most qualified to make this decision is able to (the mother). By saying someone who supports abortion in most cases is pro-abortion is not true because it implies they support it in all cases.[/quote]

It’s not about 1 abortion or millions of abortions.
it’s about a law that legalize abortion.

Once the law is passed, there can be 1 abortion or millions of abortion. It’s legal in both cases. Under this law, abortion is a right, and this right can be freely used.
So, if you support this law, you support de facto the possibility of billions of abortions.
And more importantly, your own position leaves you with nothing to say and nothing to oppose against a single abortion.

That, or you are inconsistent.

Btw, we are all “pro-choice”. Myself included.
As far as i know, no one supported forced abortions in this thread.
“Pro-lifers” are absolutely “pro-choice”, they simply think that people should face the moral, legal and penal consequences of their choices.[/quote]

What about the fact you can be against abortions but hold choice at a higher value?[/quote]

Pro-choice? So, you’re for free will? Cool, so am I. Doesn’t change that abortions are wrong. You’re stating that a woman has a right to choice or free will. No one is arguing against that. Everyone has free will to some extent, what we’re arguing about is that a doctor doesn’t have a right to remove the consequence of his actions when it comes to killing a child in its mother’s womb.

962

[quote]njrusmc wrote:
I have to ask a serious question, and I apologize if it’s been discussed.

How many of you hardcore pro-life individuals had a child when you were not ready for it?[/quote]

Matters what you mean by hardcore pro-life individual. However, I am a pro-life individual and I have two kids I was not ready for and I also pay for half of a grown woman’s bills. Which one should I murder? I probably won’t go for the grown woman because then I’d have to physically take care of the kids myself. So, the oldest or youngest? I mean the youngest is the cutest so it be pretty tough, the oldest is my best friend so I’d be somewhat distraught to take his life.

So, which one should I kill so I don’t have to take care of them, because I’m still not “ready” to take care of anyone except me.

So, they have to deal with the consequences of their actions?

Know what it’s like to commit suicide? Or, taking care of babies I’m not ready for?

Anecdotal evidence…very convincing.

I grew up like that, I’m pretty sure I’m down with doing it again rather than being murdered.

963

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]njrusmc wrote:
I bring this up because most of the pro-lifers I know have ZERO experience with the aforementioend issues. [/quote]

Just the fact that 99% of people in this thread are men should show that experience is not important when debating a subject on the inter-webs.[/quote]

If by experience, you mean anecdotal evidence than no it’s not relevant. Last time I checked… facts, documented sources, and logical arguments were necessary for the socratic method.

964

[quote]storey420 wrote:
Someone can be pro-choice while being against abortions personally.
Just like someone could be against trans fats but also be against regulating behaviors (banning TF in restaurants let say).[/quote]

Killing babies and eating trans fat is like the same thing. Great analogy.

Eating trans fat is not morally wrong. We should do good and avoid evil. Doing good can mean preventing evil to be done unto the defenseless.

965

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
I agree and I think pat is just performing mental gymnastics here so he can attack pro-choicers.
[/quote]

It’s the same thing as the people who make it a point to use the word “murder” whenever possible when talking about abortion. Dumb trick that only tries to play to peoples emotions and to appear as morally superior than your opponent.[/quote]

Sorry, how else would you like us to define murder except by calling it what it is? I believe calling something something else is called equivocation or did I get that wrong?

966

[quote]storey420 wrote:
Someone can be pro-choice while being against abortions personally.
[/quote]
False dichotomy. Whether or not you are for personal abortions is irreverent. If you are for the practice, you are pro-abortion. It’s binary.

You are still pro-transfat, you just don’t want to consume them,

[quote]
Its all semantics anyway. Call it pro-choice and pro-taking away choice
With the logic process Pat is using there would be no such thing as a pro-life person that supported the death penalty for felons.[/quote]

The logic process pat is using is that abortion is murder. It’s a position you cannot disprove, whether you like it or not. The rest is a red herring, a diversion.
To be ‘pro-life’ you technically must be against the death penalty, which I am. But it does not matter, I am anti-abortion, as a least common denominator.

967

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]storey420 wrote:
Someone can be pro-choice while being against abortions personally.
Just like someone could be against trans fats but also be against regulating behaviors (banning TF in restaurants let say).
Its all semantics anyway. Call it pro-choice and pro-taking away choice
With the logic process Pat is using there would be no such thing as a pro-life person that supported the death penalty for felons.[/quote]

I agree and I think pat is just performing mental gymnastics here so he can attack pro-choicers.

I also think it’s stupid when people call a Pro-Lifer “anti woman.”

You can be pro-life and pro-woman, they are not mutually exclusive positions either.[/quote]

I am playing mental gymnastics? I am not the one who is trying to make the taking of a human life, not the taking of a human life if the human life is tiny, there for it’s not big enough to be a human life, or some such non-sense.
If you are for the practice of abortion for you or someone else, you are for abortion and hence pro-abortion.

I cannot think of anything more retarded than saying you oppose it personally, but are for it for everybody else. This is human life we are talking about. It’s intrinsic worth is not a matter of opinion or which way the wind blows a particular day.

If you know it’s personally wrong, you know it’s wrong. This isn’t a personal choice though, it involves somebody else whose not being considered as worth even living. So it’s a choice for somebody else.

If you won’t personally do it, you know it’s wrong, you’re just to chicken shit to take a stand for what’s right, because it may not be popular. Whoopie, somebody may not like you for speaking the truth! Wow, it may not be popular!

Shit or get off the pot. Abortion is right or it’s wrong. It’s not wrong for you and right for somebody else. It’s inconsistent at the very least.

I don’t need popularity or approval, the shit is murder and that shit is wrong.

Don’t like me? I guess I’ll try not to cry myself to sleep tonight.

This shit is weak.

968

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
I agree and I think pat is just performing mental gymnastics here so he can attack pro-choicers.
[/quote]

It’s the same thing as the people who make it a point to use the word “murder” whenever possible when talking about abortion. Dumb trick that only tries to play to peoples emotions and to appear as morally superior than your opponent.[/quote]

Fine, I will settle for the killing of a human life…Murder is just shorter, either is just honest.

969

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]njrusmc wrote:
I bring this up because most of the pro-lifers I know have ZERO experience with the aforementioend issues. [/quote]

Just the fact that 99% of people in this thread are men should show that experience is not important when debating a subject on the inter-webs.[/quote]

The effects of abortion go beyond being a woman and having your internals destroyed. Would you be willing to pay $1,000 a month (after taxes of course) for 18 years because of a one-time mistake you made? Just something to think about.

970

[quote]njrusmc wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]njrusmc wrote:
I bring this up because most of the pro-lifers I know have ZERO experience with the aforementioend issues. [/quote]

Just the fact that 99% of people in this thread are men should show that experience is not important when debating a subject on the inter-webs.[/quote]

The effects of abortion go beyond being a woman and having your internals destroyed. Would you be willing to pay $1,000 a month (after taxes of course) for 18 years because of a one-time mistake you made? Just something to think about.[/quote]

I certainly would not like that.

971

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
I agree and I think pat is just performing mental gymnastics here so he can attack pro-choicers.
[/quote]

It’s the same thing as the people who make it a point to use the word “murder” whenever possible when talking about abortion. Dumb trick that only tries to play to peoples emotions and to appear as morally superior than your opponent.[/quote]

Fine, I will settle for the killing of a human life…Murder is just shorter, either is just honest.[/quote]

Just like the death penalty is the killing of a human life.

972

[quote]pat wrote:

I am playing mental gymnastics?[/quote]

Yes

[quote]pat wrote:
I cannot think of anything more retarded than saying you oppose it personally, but are for it for everybody else.[/quote]

Well I’m personally against eating yourself stupid and becoming 500lbs. I would go as far as saying it’s immoral to make yourself a burden on the system.

But because I’m against prohibiting such practises does not mean I’m Pro-obesity.

[quote]pat wrote:

This is human life we are talking about. It’s intrinsic worth is not a matter of opinion or which way the wind blows a particular day.

If you know it’s personally wrong, you know it’s wrong. This isn’t a personal choice though, it involves somebody else whose not being considered as worth even living. So it’s a choice for somebody else. [/quote]

Actually, what I think is wrong and what I think people should have a choice for are two different things. I think it’s wrong to cheat on one’s wife but I think people should have the choice to do so.

[quote]pat wrote:

If you won’t personally do it, you know it’s wrong, you’re just to chicken shit to take a stand for what’s right, because it may not be popular. Whoopie, somebody may not like you for speaking the truth! Wow, it may not be popular!

Shit or get off the pot. Abortion is right or it’s wrong. It’s not wrong for you and right for somebody else. It’s inconsistent at the very least.

I don’t need popularity or approval, the shit is murder and that shit is wrong.

Don’t like me? I guess I’ll try not to cry myself to sleep tonight.

This shit is weak.[/quote]

For the last time, not everything that is wrong is illegal. Stop conflating the two.

973

[quote]pat wrote:
False dichotomy. Whether or not you are for personal abortions is irreverent. If you are for the practice, you are pro-abortion. It’s binary.
[/quote]

Why?

Because you say so?

974

ok.
i can’t use the term “pro-choice”, because it’s a fallacious euphemism.
i can’t use the term “pro-abortion” because it starts multiple pages of false analogies and various semantical diversions.

So, from now on, i will use “pro-abortion-as-a-right” to describe most of you.
And “personally-anti-abortion-but-pro-abortion-as-a-right” to describe the rest.

Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V for the win :stuck_out_tongue:

975

[quote]kamui wrote:
ok.
i can’t use the term “pro-choice”, because it’s a fallacious euphemism.
i can’t use the term “pro-abortion” because it starts multiple pages of false analogies and various semantical diversions.

So, from now on, i will use “pro-abortion-as-a-right” to describe most of you.
And “personally-anti-abortion-but-pro-abortion-as-a-right” to describe the rest.

Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V for the win :stuck_out_tongue:

[/quote]

Pro-abortion in terms of this thread is just pro-abortion movement or pro-abortion rights but its easier to say the 1 word version. Or do you want to argue there is a difference?

976

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

Go over it again it is…

I am not pro-abortion. Do you want to eat pizza right now? No? Then I guess you’re anti-pizza. Do you see the problem with that? Just as I don’t try to forcefully stop women from getting abortion, I don’t avidly attempt to get them to have abortions either. To say I’m “pro-abortion” is a deliberate semantical manipulation of facts.
[/quote]
Incorrect. Man you sure know how to paint yourself into corners. This isn’t really hard. You are pro-abortion because you support the practice. You falling into the fallacy of false alternatives. Not wanting a pizza today, isn’t anti-pizza. Being against the existence of pizza is anti-pizza. You are pro-abortion because you support the existence of the practice and people right to use it. This is not a divisive term if you are for the practice of abortion.
The stupidity here is getting deep.

[quote]
The purpose of labels is to describe something constant. You consistently oppose abortion, you are anti abortion. You are not consistently pro life (as you’ve admitted there are such scenarios) so you are not pro life. Does that make you anti-life? No. That’s equally retarded, just in the opposite direction. So too is it the case that saying I’m pro-abortion is equally retarded as saying I’m anti-abortion. The fact of the matter is, neither one applies to me because the constant here isn’t my personal desire to see abortions either happen or not happen, but my desire to see the option left up to the mothers. The term for that is pro-choice.

If you don’t want to use that term, then fine. Feel free to use the term “pro-abortion” like the manipulative weasel you are, but in the interest of fairness I too will use an equally manipulative and misguiding term, anti-freedom. You oppose the freedom of choice when it comes to abortion, hence you are anti-freedom. It follows equally as well as your term.

You disagree? I can’t wait to hear why…[/quote]

Choosing to murder is not a tenet of freedom. Again, fallacy of false alternatives. Wake me when you have a point.[/quote]

I’m not for the practice of abortion, I’m for the option. Like how I’m not “for” boob-jobs (the surgery, not the other kind), but I am “for” the option. It’s only a difference in emphasise, granted, but if you insist on changing my title to suit your view, then you have no right to complain when I do the same. I can make the same argument you’re making for why you are anti-X as well.

You say I’m pro-abortion because I’m “for” the practice of abortion, but this is only true in some cases. I’m not “for” the practice of abortion when the mother wants the child. In that case I’m anti-abortion, because it would be involuntary. Am I anti-abortion now? No? Then your label lacks consistency.

The fact is we have two labels here; pro-choice and pro-abortion. Pro-abortion is only adequate to describe me when I’m for the option of abortion, it doesn’t make sense in the circumstances where I am not for abortion, which do come up believe it or not. However, I’m always pro-choice, so this is clearly the more accurate label and the only reason for you to pick the former over the later is if you have an agenda requiring semantical manipulation.

Fine, I’ll just call you anti-freedom then. are you always anti-freedom? No, but you are when it comes to people killing you, and using your logic if a label describes you some of the time, then that label is adequate. More adequate, in fact, than a label that describes your position with consistency. Therefore, you are actually more anti-freedom than you are anti-abortion.

The difference in accuracy of these two labels is the same as the difference in the two labels for my position and I’m so generous I even allow you to pick which set of rules we go by, but I’m not generous enough to be inconsistent for you, sorry.

Finally, freedom doesn’t end at the things you don’t like. If we only have freedom to the extent that we don’t do things you don’t like, then we don’t actually have freedom at all. You’re a catholic, so I know that idea doesn’t quite click with you, but having freedom means having the freedom to kill other people and if you don’t want to be killed, then you are anti-freedom at least to the extent that you don’t want other people killing you. Is calling you anti-freedom an accurate title given this? Fuck no, but then neither is calling me pro-abortion when I’m only “pro-abortion” to the extent that mothers willingly choose to exercise such a right. [/quote]

Quit while your behind, you’re pro-abortion. Grow a pair and deal. I am not “anti-freedom” because I don’t agree with the freedom to kill. Like I said ‘fallacy of false alternatives’… You’re trying so super hard for a ridiculous end. You can’t change what things are by sheer will. These things are not in your control.[/quote]

Wrong. You’re the try-hard here. You want to have your cake and eat it too. You are anti-freedom to the extent that your support for freedom stops at murder. How about you grow a pair and deal? Or are you all talk and no walk?

You don’t like this term? Fine, agree to my terms and I’ll agree to yours. I think it’s a fair deal, especially when I’ve shown your proposed label (pro-abortion) to be less accurate than my proposed label (pro-choice).

If terms that only apply part-time are adequate in your eyes, then anybody can be labelled as anything. You’ve defeated the purpose of labelling things with your nonsense.

977

[quote]kamui wrote:

i can’t use the term “pro-abortion” because it starts multiple pages of false analogies and various semantical diversions.

[/quote]

I can’t use the term “anti-freedom,” because apparently, partially applicable terms only apply when it’s convenient for the “I know what’s best for everyone always!” crowd.

I can say things too, kamui. Do you have anything else to bring to the table or are you just going to fail-and-bail again?

978

You can call me anti-freedom all you want.
Actually, i encourage you to do so.

979

[quote]kamui wrote:
You can call me anti-freedom all you want.
Actually, i encourage you to do so. [/quote]

Why?

980

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
Pro choice. Not pro abortion.[/quote]

Same thing anymore. [/quote]

It’s not the same and you know this, so don’t be a little bitch like certain others on this board.