12
   

The Netherlands set up global safe abortion fund to counter Trump cuts

 
 
Foofie
 
  0  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2017 01:18 pm
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:

Foofie wrote:
For all the abortions, safe or unsafe, a human life is ended (aka, dies).


no. no it doesn't.


That sounds like 1930's science, before we knew how early in pregnancy a heart beats or a brain get a baby to suck his/her thumb in the womb.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2017 01:20 pm
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:

Foofie wrote:
Notice how many people of the Catholic faith are pro-abortion.


People are not pro-abortion.

People who support the right of women to have abortions are pro-life and pro-choice.




You are giving me some nice rhetoric, in my opinion; however, pro-choice is just a cute word for being an apologist for murder, in my opinion.
Walter Hinteler
 
  4  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2017 01:22 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Foofie wrote:
Actually it is my business, if one day American taxes contribute to this Dutch fund.

???
Walter Hinteler wrote:
The Netherlands' Government announced the fund to compensate for US ban on abortion funding.


As far as I understood this news, the Netherland government is setting up an alternative fund to support safe abortions ‘in order to compensate this financial blow as far as possible’.
Foofie
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2017 01:22 pm
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

ehBeth wrote:

Foofie wrote:
For all the abortions, safe or unsafe, a human life is ended (aka, dies).


no. no it doesn't.


How about a "potential human life is ended"?


No. The life is already there. A baby, when delivered is not just a "potential" adult. It is a human, whether it is age one day, or minus age nine months, or age 21 years old. A human at all data points on the graph of life.
Foofie
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2017 01:26 pm
@Miller,
Miller wrote:

Foofie wrote:

Quote:
Notice how many people of the Catholic faith are pro-abortion
.

...Thus,there is no reason to conclude that American Catholics favor abortion, while other religions do not. Is there?


I concluded nothing. The concern is that Catholic woman do get abortions and marched for CHOICE. So, one can't be a good Catholic and get an abortion. The consequences of no more Catholic orphanages, perhaps?
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  -3  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2017 01:28 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Foofie wrote:
Actually it is my business, if one day American taxes contribute to this Dutch fund.

???
Walter Hinteler wrote:
The Netherlands' Government announced the fund to compensate for US ban on abortion funding.


As far as I understood this news, the Netherland government is setting up an alternative fund to support safe abortions ‘in order to compensate this financial blow as far as possible’.



And, Der Fuhrer just wanted the Sudetanland. Ha!
0 Replies
 
ossobucotemp
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2017 02:05 pm
@Miller,
I was an intense catholic in my youth, and after some years, consider myself an atheist - but I am not a religion hater. I still have catholic friends and to the extent I know their takes on this day in time, they are ok with Roe vs Wade, but may not choose abortion themselves. Well, by now these friends are too old to give birth, but I'm thinking of my memory of them.

I've known of two people who had abortions in Tijuana - one a friend of my cousin's, so that is hearsay; the other, a close friend who showed up to a party I had invited them to in my first apartment. I didn't find out until later that that was where she/he were that morning.

It was a small apartment, a tack-on to a duplex building on Beverly Glen Blvd. I left there because of the cockroaches, but I had made it ostensibly welcoming with curtains I made, and so on (the tack-on was not well built, sink drainage wise).

There was another distressed friend there, and by now I don't remember the exact circumstance, but she was very pregnant and had found out he cheated again. He was there too. Again, I didn't know that until later. Odd first party.

Re the first two people I mentioned, they had acted.

With a wall, if it happens, some american women will likely turn to the old primitive modes, unless they are rich and can fly away.
I do conject that not all M.D.'s agree with this stricture.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2017 03:16 pm
@Foofie,
I choose to thumb you down.

Hopefully that provides the result you suggest.
0 Replies
 
Blickers
 
  3  
Reply Mon 30 Jan, 2017 01:22 pm
@Foofie,
Quote Foofie:
Quote:
No. The life is already there. A baby, when delivered is not just a "potential" adult. It is a human, whether it is age one day, or minus age nine months, or age 21 years old. A human at all data points on the graph of life.

Conversations about this never reach satisfactory conclusions. However, I find it impossible to accept that two cells which joined together five minutes ago constitute a human life equal to a newborn baby.
Foofie
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 30 Jan, 2017 01:59 pm
@Blickers,
Blickers wrote:

Quote Foofie:
Quote:
No. The life is already there. A baby, when delivered is not just a "potential" adult. It is a human, whether it is age one day, or minus age nine months, or age 21 years old. A human at all data points on the graph of life.

Conversations about this never reach satisfactory conclusions. However, I find it impossible to accept that two cells which joined together five minutes ago constitute a human life equal to a newborn baby.


Pregnancy tests do not show positive after five minutes of conception. The hyperbole is of no value to an argument. However, as you point out, "Conversations about this never reach satisfactory conclusions." I believe that might result, since I never hear the simple argument from secular pro-lifers, what religion says, "sanctify life." The argument over what's a human is just a tactical diversion, in my opinion, or an incorrect identification of the argument.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2017 03:38 am
@Blickers,
That's because you're not in the business of telling women what they can do with their bodies.
McGentrix
 
  0  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2017 07:29 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

That's because you're not in the business of telling women what they can do with their bodies.

This is an argument I've always felt was rather disingenuous.

Examples of the Govt telling people what they can do with their bodies:

You MUST wear a seat belt despite the only one being harmed is yourself
18 to smoke
21 to drink
18 to get a tattoo
no smoking in public bldgs
drugs are illegal
prostitution is illegal
cannot tell a woman her butt looks big in those pants
Some extreme examples:
limits on large soda drinks
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2017 07:35 am
@McGentrix,
You believe all sorts of nonsense. Reason is alien to you. When you show a fraction of concern for the born child that you do for the unborn you might be taken seriously. This is all about keeping women in their place. You should try moving to Saudi Arabia, you'll love it there.
McGentrix
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2017 08:04 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

You believe all sorts of nonsense. Reason is alien to you. When you show a fraction of concern for the born child that you do for the unborn you might be taken seriously. This is all about keeping women in their place. You should try moving to Saudi Arabia, you'll love it there.


[insult]stuff that would be edited by a mod[/insult]

You really know nothing about me or my beliefs. My giving examples of other things that women cannot do with their bodies does nothing to give you a clue about my beliefs. Instead of refuting them, you've instead chosen the path of the loser by spewing invective.

Once you start down that path, you've proven that my points are valid and despite your best effort you just can't get over that fact.
hightor
 
  5  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2017 09:04 am
@McGentrix,
18 to smoke — research discovers link to cancer and danger of addiction, wait until you're more mature

21 to drink — experience demonstrates bad consequence, wait until you're old enough

18 to get a tattoo — wait until you're old enough to make this kind of decision

no smoking in public bldgs — danger of second-hand smoke, littering concerns

drugs are illegal — some drugs are dangerous, no nodding out at work please

prostitution is illegal — subjects women to danger and degradation

cannot tell a woman her butt looks big in those pants — why in hell would anyone do this?

Some extreme examples:

limits on large soda drinks — this one really floors me — buy two of them then!

Must bring pregnancy to term...

None of the other laws interfere with the intimate lives of people. Some of them recognize the rights of adults that don't apply to children, some are concerned with public health and workplace safety. I think the prohibition of abortion is significantly more intrusive than say, mandatory seat belt laws. It's significantly more intrusive than a hypothetical decree that men must sit down to urinate.

Think of it — your birth control failed, your partner lied about getting a vasectomy, your fetus is not viable, delivery is likely to injure or kill you, you're mentally unstable and realize you're just not cut out for 18 years of child-rearing — if find yourself in any of these unfortunate circumstances and you must bring the pregnancy to term...well, it kind of makes having to smoke on the sidewalk look rather trivial.
McGentrix
 
  0  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2017 09:10 am
@hightor,
I didn't say they were all equal, just that the govt has several laws that tell people what they can and cannot do with their bodies.

Let's bear in mind through all of this that I am pro-choice. So, before you guys start hating on me, know that.
hightor
 
  4  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2017 09:31 am
@McGentrix,
I didn't suspect you of being irredeemably pro-life. And I don't hate reasonable people who disagree with me, especially if they can explain their position rather than just posting someone else's not-very-clever graphic that they found on some garbage site. But I wanted to emphasize the difference between limits on behavior and laws which give the state the right to control your bodily processes and reproductive choices.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2017 10:34 am
@McGentrix,
Based on what you've posted I know a lot more about you than would I care to know. You just don't like being called out.
McGentrix
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2017 10:48 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

Based on what you've posted I know a lot more about you than would I care to know. You just don't like being called out.


What have you called me out on? Remind me.
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2017 10:52 am
@McGentrix,
Just read my posts on this thread, it's all there. Your sealioning doesn't work with me.
 

Related Topics

How will Trump handle losing the election? - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Trump and the Central Park Five - Discussion by ossobuco
TRUMP's GONE---This just in - Discussion by farmerman
Trump : Why? - Question by Yalow
Project 2025 - Discussion by izzythepush
Why so many believe Trump - Discussion by vikorr
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/28/2024 at 12:08:02