The Abortion Question

[StLucieBengal]

(09-27-2015, 03:32 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: I agree that arguing the extremes of either side is usually not productive.  That's why I don't refer to people that are pro-choice as being "cool" with "baby murder", because it doesn't accurately describe their position. I also understand that pro-lifers believe life to be precious, and I do agree with that.  However I also understand that how ugly it may be, there are circumstances in which a pregnancy may need to be terminated.  I think we all agree that if it comes to that, the sooner the better and it should be done medically and as humanely as possible.  Again it's a very personal matter and not my place to make that decision for you.

I sometimes use spicy language to place emphasis on a serious topic . Too often we try and butter things up with words that are not accurately describing what's happening or allowing people to straddle a line in their minds.

The death of babies deserves spicy and blunt language. I used to get upset at the phrasing of pro choice because it's just death. But really it is choice.... The choice to kill or give life. Women are like Caesar in the Galdiator arena .... Thumbs up or down. Now are we the crowd? What are we chanting?

[GMDino]

(09-28-2015, 02:23 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Pro abortion people are constantly advocating for relaxing limitations on abortion.  

So all they want is more sex Ed, plus relaxed abortion restrictions.   Your points would have some teeth if the increased education shrunk the window for abortions.    But that's not the case with pro abortion folks.

What is the argument you could/would make to say that increased education would NOT help reduce abortions?

Knowing about safer sex and contraceptives and biology is one of the best ways to lower abortion and pregnancy rates.  Would less drivers ed make the roads safer?  Would less training make owning a gun safer?

Abortions have shown a steady decrease in numbers across the board in the US.  Whether red state or blue.  They will never completely go away.  Even if they are made illegal and punishable by death by rabid badger because desperate people do desperate things.

[BmorePat87]

(09-28-2015, 02:29 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I sometimes use spicy language to place emphasis on a serious topic .  Too often we try and butter things up with words that are not accurately describing what's happening or allowing people to straddle a line in their minds.  

The death of babies deserves spicy and blunt language.   I used to get upset at the phrasing of pro choice because it's just death.    But really it is choice.... The choice to kill or give life.   Women are like Caesar in the Galdiator arena .... Thumbs up or down.      Now are we the crowd?   What are we chanting?

You like to pretend to be quasi-libertarian. Do you own your own body?

[CKwi88]

(09-26-2015, 05:52 PM)Aquapod770 Wrote: When does life begin?


This seems to be the most widely debated question when it comes to abortion. Most pro-life people say conception, while pro-choice opinion tends to vary widely.  So my question to all of you is; When does the right to life of the baby outweigh the right to choice of the woman? At conception? When the heart starts beating? When the brain begins developing? Or never?

I'm a solid six pages after, but what the hey. 

The question of when life begins is hardly as black and white as just about everyone wishes it could be. An argument can be made for conception, an argument can be made after x weeks, and an argument can be made for at birth. People will just answer based on their own personal beliefs, and will more likely than not be rather adamant on such a controversial issue.

I personally can't advocate for giving the government or other people the power to dictate what people can or can't do with their bodies, no matter how reprehensible I may find abortion.  

[Belsnickel]

(09-28-2015, 02:23 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Pro abortion people are constantly advocating for relaxing limitations on abortion.  

So all they want is more sex Ed, plus relaxed abortion restrictions.   Your points would have some teeth if the increased education shrunk the window for abortions.    But that's not the case with pro abortion folks.

The pro-choice crowd is constantly opposing the unnecessary legislation pushed by the pro-life side in a thinly veiled attempt to skirt Roe v. Wade and make abortion illegal.

[BFritz21]

Haven't read through all of these posts, so forgive me if this has been said.

Life begins and is no longer just a glob of cells when it begins growing and evolving.

Growth and evolution inside a womb means that it is something alive, does it not?

People might say "but it can't breathe or live on its own." Neither could I for two weeks. Actually, it would be a little under three months if you considered the entire coma, but I was just talking about breathing on my own.

When something is growing and developing, it's no longer a group of cells that can just be killed off like it's not human.

[CKwi88]

(09-28-2015, 11:33 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: The pro-choice crowd is constantly opposing the unnecessary legislation pushed by the pro-life side in a thinly veiled attempt to skirt Roe v. Wade and make abortion illegal.

If pro-choice = "Pro-abortion" what should the sensationalized term be for the opposite? 

Pro-government control over bodies?
Pro-big government?
Anti-personal autonomy?

[Belsnickel]

(09-28-2015, 11:46 AM)CKwi88 Wrote: If pro-choice = "Pro-abortion" what should the sensationalized term be for the opposite? 

Pro-government control over bodies?
Pro-big government?
Anti-personal autonomy?

I try to stick with the terms the sides label themselves with. The pro-choice crowd calls pro-life anti-choice, and pro-life calls pro-choice pro-abortion. It's a silly back and forth propagandist thing and using those sensationalist terms just shows that you have a strong bias and to me point to a lack of any intent of having a true discussion about the topic at hand.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-27-2015, 08:12 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sn-GL0ZD1Tg

Ah, yes.  Thank you.  "Cool" completely taken out of context which is what I suspected given the sources.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-28-2015, 02:23 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Pro abortion people are constantly advocating for relaxing limitations on abortion.  

So all they want is more sex Ed, plus relaxed abortion restrictions.   Your points would have some teeth if the increased education shrunk the window for abortions.    But that's not the case with pro abortion folks.

False.

[Rotobeast]

(09-28-2015, 12:40 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Ah, yes.  Thank you.  "Cool" completely taken out of context which is what I suspected given the sources.

I feel like she was trying to convince herself that she did the "right" thing and made the video to force herself into that reality.
Just the feeling I get from her body language.
I don't feel she was trying to say "Ahh man... this is cool ! Everyone should do it !".
I do feel she was trying to say "Hey, this is ok. It is cool (ok) to do this.".

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(09-28-2015, 02:29 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I sometimes use spicy language to place emphasis on a serious topic .  Too often we try and butter things up with words that are not accurately describing what's happening or allowing people to straddle a line in their minds.  

The death of babies deserves spicy and blunt language.   I used to get upset at the phrasing of pro choice because it's just death.    But really it is choice.... The choice to kill or give life.   Women are like Caesar in the Galdiator arena .... Thumbs up or down.      Now are we the crowd?   What are we chanting?

You say spicy and blunt.  I say sensationalizing, and it has the same affect that the profanity you were complaining of my using.  Make ya a deal, you stop sensationalizing and I'll refrain from profanity (well at least in here, can't promise anything in the game day chat room. )

[*PhilHos*]

(09-28-2015, 11:00 AM)CKwi88 Wrote: I personally can't advocate for giving the government or other people the power to dictate what people can or can't do with their bodies, no matter how reprehensible I may find abortion.  

First off, the government already has the power to dictate what people can or can't do with their own bodies.

More importantly, a fetus is NOT a part of a woman's body. It's a separate entity. 

[GodHatesBengals]

(09-28-2015, 04:29 PM)PhilHos Wrote: First off, the government already has the power to dictate what people can or can't do with their own bodies.

More importantly, a fetus is NOT a part of a woman's body. It's a separate entity. 

Well, boogers, turds and menstrual tissue are also "separate entities", but I doubt you want to get involved in what women should do with theirs.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-28-2015, 01:17 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: I feel like she was trying to convince herself that she did the "right" thing and made the video to force herself into that reality.
Just the feeling I get from her body language.
I don't feel she was trying to say "Ahh man... this is cool ! Everyone should do it !".
I do feel she was trying to say "Hey, this is ok. It is cool (ok) to do this.".

I once had a tree landing during an Army training exercise.  Luckily, I fell all the way through the trees without getting hung up.  Unluckily, one of my ass cheeks hit a tree stump when I hit the ground.  As I laid there writhing and sobbing tactically from the pain of almost being butt ****** by a tree stump, I might have thought, "Cool."  Not because I thought tree landings were cool, but cool as in I'm not bleeding from my asshole cool.

(The rate of decent of a T-10C is about the same as jumping off a two story building.)

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-28-2015, 04:29 PM)PhilHos Wrote: First off, the government already has the power to dictate what people can or can't do with their own bodies.

More importantly, a fetus is NOT a part of a woman's body. It's a separate entity. 

Actually, it's both.  A fetus is separate entity and a part of the woman's body.  (A fetus has lungs, yet can't breath on its own.)

[Rotobeast]

(09-28-2015, 05:46 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I once had a tree landing during an Army training exercise.  Luckily, I fell all the way through the trees without getting hung up.  Unluckily, one of my ass cheeks hit a tree stump when I hit the ground.  As I laid there writhing and sobbing tactically from the pain of almost being butt ****** by a tree stump, I might have thought, "Cool."  Not because I thought tree landings were cool, but cool as in I'm not bleeding from my asshole cool.

(The rate of decent of a T-10C is about the same as jumping off a two story building.)

My sides..... they have left orbit.

[StLucieBengal]

(09-28-2015, 07:26 AM)GMDino Wrote: What is the argument you could/would make to say that increased education would NOT help reduce abortions?

Knowing about safer sex and contraceptives and biology is one of the best ways to lower abortion and pregnancy rates.  Would less drivers ed make the roads safer?  Would less training make owning a gun safer?

Abortions have shown a steady decrease in numbers across the board in the US.  Whether red state or blue.  They will never completely go away.  Even if they are made illegal and punishable by death by rabid badger because desperate people do desperate things.

Then there is no reason to not close the window where you can have an abortion. If education works the. Let's close the window.

[StLucieBengal]

(09-28-2015, 09:02 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: You like to pretend to be quasi-libertarian. Do you own your own body?

Sure but that doesn't give me the right to murder someone.

[Blutarsky]

(09-28-2015, 11:46 AM)CKwi88 Wrote: If pro-choice = "Pro-abortion" what should the sensationalized term be for the opposite? 

Anti-Abortion. Whats so difficult about that?

The phrase "anti-abortion" is more synonymous with "pro-life" than "pro-choice" is with "pro-abortion".
 
The aim of the "Pro-choice" moniker is to mask or de-sensitize a heinous act.