"Abortion is murder!"...how to destroy it in 3-4 quick questions

It more than describes the truth, or can you offer more than just denial to substantiate your claim ... I can offer more than enough evidence to support mine.

I suggest you study your own self-defence laws.

Are you one of these that seems to think that deadly force only applies in life threatening circumstance, because it doesn't.

 

It's really kind of sick what so many of these women are doing in their private lives.
They should take better care of their unborn offspring they brought into this world.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm so glad I was a life and not a "choice", what about you?

 

The only world you will ever see is that of a better place than yous opinions.

 

Are you still wasting your time trying to convince me(and yourself) that she is killing the baby in self defense from an act she knowing committed that creates the life she took? You are insane.

 

It's also just my "mere opinion" that killing a woman for aborting her baby is wrong.
But that's just my opinion. Who am I to try to impose my values onto someone else if they want to do what they think is right?

Basically I'm saying why should the woman get any more protection than the life inside of her?

 

Why should the "life" inside her get more protection than the woman?

 

Thank you, tack, kiitos, grazie, gracias, merci, hvala, shoukran, danke, sbasiba, tesekkur!

You stop this. It is not good for a woman to act like this. As a matter of fact nobody likes an entitled bully of any gender.

No, emotion thingy is a female trait which you very much display. The guy made some real valid and logic statement based on nothing but science. He sure is a life.

Yea.

 

While you are entitled to your opinion and I commend you on your adult response, there are a few things I'd like to ask you.

1. Do you consider it ethically and morally wrong for a person to defend themselves against non-consented injuries?
2. Do you consider executions murder?
3. Do you consider deaths in war murder?
4. What makes you believe that the foetus is vulnerable, when it has the power to suppress the local immunity reaction of the female, to increase her hormone levels by up to 300%, to increase her blood pressure by approx. 15%, to re-route her circulatory system and to grow a new organ inside her body?

So no abortion for foetal disability incompatible with life?
Do you consider all sex to be immoral and destructive?
Over 50% of abortions are performed on women who use contraception, do you consider these women as being reckless?

I've seen this argument before but as yet have seen no evidence to it's reality, so the question is do you have evidence to support it?

No the goal is to reduce abortion, something I think both sides agree on, the difference is how it can be achieved. Pro-lifers for the most rely on denial of reality and enforced subjugation, while pro-choicers understand reality and freedom of the individual, take education for example abstinence sex education is, and has been, a complete failure in real terms, where as comprehensive sex education coupled with free at source contraception of all types is proven to have the effect of reducing unplanned pregnancies and as such abortions.

You comment of "blasphemic stance for a woman to take. " is little more than an attempt to promote the stereotypical position of women.

I can find no reliable evidence to support you 30% claim, so I would be interested to see where that figure comes from.

Women on average have 30 years of probable reproductive ability, that equates to 360 times she might become pregnant (assuming sexual intercourse happens at least once per month) it is hardly surprising that "accidents" happen, in fact it is surprising that they don't have more abortions.

I 100% disagree, it was not so long ago that women were property of their fathers and then their husbands, they had no recourse to refuse their husband sexual intercourse and if they did there was no legal restriction to a husband raping his wife, in fact rape within marriage was not fully illegal in the U.S. until 1993, but even then a higher level of requirement was needed to prosecute than was required for non-marital rape, even today South Carolina requires excessive force or violence before a husband can be charged with raping his wife. Liberation of women finally allowed them to decide when and with whom they had sex, your assertion again attempts to portray women as weak willed and unable to make decisions without someone else doing it for them.

 

Which is irrelevant to the discussion.

 

Yet another one who has no concept of biological dependency and social dependency, tell me what injuries does a women get from her born child?

 

You were never anything other than a choice.

 

I am not trying to convince you of anything, I know how closed your mind is to anything that you cannot refute .. I'm sorry that the reality scares you. The act only creates a risk and no person is expected to suffer injury just because they took a risk, neither is it legally acceptable to force someone to suffer injury because they took a risk. I suggest you study your own laws before making any more ridiculous statements.

- - - Updated - - -

She doesn't

 

I view abortion as birth control to be the unjust taking of another human's life. As a political issue, i am forced to compromise, in the effort to save *some* from the knife. It is pragmatism, in dealing with an unjust, immoral system. Just as some abolitionists viewed slavery as immoral, not all went the route of John Brown to fight this injustice. So many pro lifers will concede some abortions for the opportunity to save some.

The 'all or nothing' approach is more for the rabid left, who will not compromise, & insist in their way or the highway. Pragmatists will take what they can get, & then work for more.

I notice that the humanity of the unborn child is still ignored. If it is not the killing of a unique individual human life, what is it? There is a growing human inside the womb, with its own dna, personality, heartbeat, brain, & fingerprints. How can you justify killing him for the convenience of 3rd parties?

But i do not expect any change, as the progressive left has complete control over the institutions, the megaphones, & the propaganda mills. All i can do as a citizen, is vote my conscience, & hope that there will be a moral awakening, so that innocent people are not murdered for convenience & to support a prolific abortion lobby.

 

BTW, i seem to notice that this same thread has been run before, with the same lame arguments to 'destroy prolifers!' Is this part of the propaganda stream? You keep running the same talking points, hoping to deceive new people & keep the baby killing machine going?

 

exactly the same way you can justify killing another person when they are injuring you without your consent, and they hold all the attributes you have stated above as well. So tell me how you can justify killing in self-defence for one group of people but not for another ... You do realise that is a direct violation of the equal protection clause don't you?

 

No it is not. You are punishing an innocent person who just happened to be conceived in a time when stupid women allow baby hating men to force them to kill their babies for personal convenience. The issue is the mother's mammalian status. If she just laid an egg, others could hatch it. But our poor offspring are dependent on a nurturing womb (not necessarily the biological mother's) for protection. After birth, this same baby is equally dependent for many more years on someone else. You penalize the baby for its dependency & weakness, rather than protect it from those who would do it harm. That is inhuman, barbaric, & has been anathema to humanity for millennia. That we have certain people promoting such atrocities only shows the depths to which humans will go to make a buck, or to push some agenda.

 

1. Depends.
2. Deoends on the reason for execution I would say.
3. Very often are war casualtes murder. In the true sense of the word, it is indeed "murder". People who have never met each other trying to kill each other is murder.
4. Are you really this stupid or are you just being a smartass?

How the heck does question 1-3 have anything at all to with abotion anyways? I cannot see the contrast, however I find it really cute and rather sexist that you try to put things in perspective for me as a male by brining up the "male equivivalance" of the "Is it murder or is it not"-dilemma (war) and other typically "masculine" things like self-defense in hopes of spotting hypocricy in my stance.

If Mother's or baby's life is in danger, I am pro.

Obviously not. I am pretty sure I was very clear in specifying exactly what kind of behavior I was referring to.

This smells bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

 

Personal observations.

Nonetheless, I find it very disturbing that people, especially women, do not see an increasing amount of abortions as a worrying trend.

If you with "stereotypical position of women" mean the same thing as I did- Motherhood- I am afraid to tell it is actually not just a stereotype or social construction but very much is it a biological trait. Women are the ones who give birth and all women have some "motherness" in them, naturally and also women are- biologically- more emotional and caring than men. With all these fantastic qualities in mind I cannot see how the correspond with wanting to kill your own baby....That is so lion male- esque (note that even here is it the male and not the female who does such horrible things).

Blah blah blah.

No matter what you say I will remain convinced that abortion is not a contraceptive and that the modern view of the procedure and on sex is way to loose and immoral. Abortion should only be used for the right reasons and must never be abused. I think you make a very good point about education. Sex-ed surely has to stpe up its game in informing about contraceptives, which they really suck at in Sweden. All the Swedish sex-ed classes focuse solely on the genitalia, how they are built and how they work and that's pretty much it. WTF?

Additionally, it is not abortion per se that I oppose but rather the destructive structures that surround the matter: Glorification of the single life, alcohol-culture, glorification of the "Sex&City-woman", normalization of one-night stands and the the general acceptance of poor behavior in general has created the wrong view on abortion that justifies the abuse of the method.

 

1. Do you consider it ethically and morally wrong for a person to defend themselves against non-consented injuries?

 

I am done with you. Either it is due to a language barrier where English not being my first language making it hard for me to communicate my poistion or either it is you who are not very good at ,or simply not wanting to, interpreting texts.

 

Or maybe it's just you getting put in your place on a regular basis....


Can't answer?....then RUN !!!! Flee from the facts so you'll be happy!!! ByE

 

You constantly have a very nasty attitude that makes it not very nice to debate with you. You use bully tactics like above and you accuse people of saying things they have never said, eg. Me saying women have no right to self-defense.

Also you have already called me a "sexist" and "misogynist" several times and this is the most usual response by people of your kind when they have nothing to say.

 

This is a common tactic with this poster, whom i have had many exchanges with over the years on this topic. It is merely a tactic, to deflect, demean, & promote propaganda for the abortion industry. I avoid discussions with this poster as well, for the same reasons.