ABORTION.......

Apisa:

Quote:

Fanatics like you would give imagined rights of eight cells priority over the rights of a grown woman

...and idiots like you want to conjur a clear delineation between an unborn child who has every feature a born one does except getting oxygen and nutrition through its face instead of umbilically.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Apisa:

Quote:
Fanatics like you would give imagined rights of eight cells priority over the rights of a grown woman

...and idiots like you want to conjur a clear delineation between an unborn child who has every feature a born one does except getting oxygen and nutrition through its face instead of umbilically.

I thought you were the person who only responds to provocation directed at you, Snood.

So...you are a liar as well as someone who continues to be a pot calling a kettle black.

0 Replies

It isn't those eight cells that are an issue is it? It is the whole concept that a woman should be able to kill her baby for any reason, at any time, so long as the entire baby has not emerged from the birth canal.

The pro-abortion crowd gets more and more frantic, and more and more hostile, and more and more irrational, and more and more insulting, and more and more angry as their logic falls apart in the face of the truth.

I have seen nobody on the prolife side who has advocated that abortion should never be legal for anybody for any reason. But the pro-abortion people always come back to that, don't they? Those who value human life at whatever stage are painted as wild-eyed fanatics who would strip women of all their rights.

Well I oppose abortion for convenience, and I do not believe that infringes on any civil or inalienable right I possess. I have the right to become pregnant or not risk preganancy. My rights include a choice in whether to take the risk and include acceptance of the consequences for whatever risk I choose to take. I even have the right to ensure that I will never become pregant.

Once I accept the risk and become pregnant, I have willingly and knowingly accepted responsibility for the care and welfare of a passenger that will be with me hopefully for about nine months. Morally, I have no right to kill that passenger simply because it is inconvenient to have him/her on board.

Any other point of view makes no sense. If we believe fathers who assume the risk of fathering a child should have to accept the consequences of doing so whether or not they wanted a child, then mothers should be held to the same standard.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

It isn't those eight cells that are an issue is it? It is the whole concept that a woman should be able to kill her baby for any reason, at any time, so long as the entire baby has not emerged from the birth canal.

What is at issue is the fanatical insistence that a fetus is a living human being. What is at issue is the kind of nonsense you trotted out in your last post...that has a few undifferentiated cells being a living human being...and potentially having rights that take rights away from a pregnant woman.

Quote:

The pro-abortion crowd gets more and more frantic, and more and more hostile, and more and more irrational, and more and more insulting, and more and more angry as their logic falls apart in the face of the truth.

One...the logic of the pro-choice crowd is not falling apart...it is the pretend logic of the anti-choice crowd that is. And talk about frantic...well...they are FRANTIC....and angry...and insulting.

Quote:

I have seen nobody on the prolife side who has advocated that abortion should never be legal for anybody for any reason.

Hummm, I wonder why not.

I have.

And...it seems to me that if the anti-choice side were to be consistent...it would advocate that abortion should not be legal for any reason.

Or have I missed the point where some developing fetuses are not "innocent unborn children" because of special circumstances?

If it is...(in your words)...okay to kill some...why is it not okay to kill any or all?

Quote:

But the pro-abortion people always come back to that, don't they?

Well, most pro-choice people realize the fanatics on the anti-choice side are trying desperately to close the door on choice a tiny bit...so they can eventually close it completely. And they realize that many of the anti-choice people are liars who will pretend anything to try to get their way. So...they note it.

Nothing wrong with that.

Quote:

Those who value human life at whatever stage are painted as wild-eyed fanatics who would strip women of all their rights.

Right...people who would strip a woman of her rights in favor of the supposed rights of a clump of a few cells are dangerous people. Best to warn everyone.

Quote:

Well I oppose abortion for convenience, and I do not believe that infringes on any civil or inalienable right I possess.

That is your choice...and your right. Why don't you stop trying to take away other women's choices to think differently?

Quote:

I have the right to become pregnant or not risk preganancy.

Good for you.

Quote:

My rights include a choice in whether to take the risk and include acceptance of the consequences for whatever risk I choose to take. I even have the right to ensure that I will never become pregant.

And you also have a right to terminate a pregnancy should you become pregnant and choose to do so. I am fighting for your right to do that.

You are quite welcome for any thanks you offer.

Quote:

Once I accept the risk and become pregnant, I have willingly and knowingly accepted responsibility for the care and welfare of a passenger that will be with me hopefully for about nine months.

Good for you. That is your choice. Why are you trying to take that right to choose away from other women?

Quote:

Morally, I have no right to kill that passenger simply because it is inconvenient to have him/her on board.

Enough with the silly analogy. If you become pregnant...and choose to end that pregnancy...you DO HAVE A RIGHT TO OBTAIN AN ABORTION.

And that is what this is about.

Quote:

Any other point of view makes no sense.

That is so stupid I won't even deal with it.

Quote:

If we believe fathers who assume the risk of fathering a child should have to accept the consequences of doing so whether or not they wanted a child, then mothers should be held to the same standard.

Sorry you cannot see the difference...but it is of no consequences, because your perverted opinion on this issue will never again prevail in this country.

You have lost this war.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

It isn't those eight cells that are an issue is it? It is the whole concept that a woman should be able to kill her baby for any reason, at any time, so long as the entire baby has not emerged from the birth canal.

The pro-abortion crowd gets more and more frantic, and more and more hostile, and more and more irrational, and more and more insulting, and more and more angry as their logic falls apart in the face of the truth.

I have seen nobody on the prolife side who has advocated that abortion should never be legal for anybody for any reason. But the pro-abortion people always come back to that, don't they? Those who value human life at whatever stage are painted as wild-eyed fanatics who would strip women of all their rights.

Well I oppose abortion for convenience, and I do not believe that infringes on any civil or inalienable right I possess. I have the right to become pregnant or not risk preganancy. My rights include a choice in whether to take the risk and include acceptance of the consequences for whatever risk I choose to take. I even have the right to ensure that I will never become pregant.

Once I accept the risk and become pregnant, I have willingly and knowingly accepted responsibility for the care and welfare of a passenger that will be with me hopefully for about nine months. Morally, I have no right to kill that passenger simply because it is inconvenient to have him/her on board.

Any other point of view makes no sense. If we believe fathers who assume the risk of fathering a child should have to accept the consequences of doing so whether or not they wanted a child, then mothers should be held to the same standard.

Frank will jump all over you, but many/some of us agree with what you are saying. The fact that there is disagreement with Frank has him in a dither. He calls those who oppose the killing of babies (fetus if Frank prefers) fanatics. He is certainly fanatical about his opinion being the only acceptable opinion and the rest of the world can go to hell. It does not matter that some totally disagree with our thoughts on the rights of the unborn child. Those thoughts will not change. I am not trying to tell anybody what they should thing... only that they should consider all of the possiblities, options and choices.

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

Frank will jump all over you, but many/some of us agree with what you are saying. The fact that there is disagreement with Frank has him in a dither.

Me? In a dither???

Boy...do you have that all wrong!

Quote:

He calls those who oppose the killing of babies (fetus if Frank prefers) fanatics.

No. Actually he calls people who oppose abortion and who put it in terms of "killing babies" fanatics. And they are fanatics...so what is your problem with that?

Quote:

He is certainly fanatical about his opinion being the only acceptable opinion and the rest of the world can go to hell.

No place I've ever said that....but I guess it helps your case if you make stuff up.

Quote:

It does not matter that some totally disagree with our thoughts on the rights of the unborn child. Those thoughts will not change. I am not trying to tell anybody what they should thing... only that they should consider all of the possiblities, options and choices.

That's all I'm intereted in...so maybe we are in closer agreement than you think.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

snood wrote:
Apisa:

Quote:
Fanatics like you would give imagined rights of eight cells priority over the rights of a grown woman

...and idiots like you want to conjur a clear delineation between an unborn child who has every feature a born one does except getting oxygen and nutrition through its face instead of umbilically.

I thought you were the person who only responds to provocation directed at you, Snood.

So...you are a liar as well as someone who continues to be a pot calling a kettle black.

Ouch!

...Well, now you really told me- huh, pops? C'mon ole geezer, we all know you're the biggest cheap shot taking lowlife here. And liar doesn't even begin to cover the depth of denial you're in about being the person who gets in the most silly disputes.

But why don't you address how stupid it is to equate "eight cells" with a fullterm baby? Is it because you can't really resolve such abyssmal idiocy, and you want to tapdance around it?

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

It isn't those eight cells that are an issue is it? It is the whole concept that a woman should be able to kill her baby for any reason, at any time, so long as the entire baby has not emerged from the birth canal.

The pro-abortion crowd gets more and more frantic, and more and more hostile, and more and more irrational, and more and more insulting, and more and more angry as their logic falls apart in the face of the truth.

I have seen nobody on the prolife side who has advocated that abortion should never be legal for anybody for any reason. But the pro-abortion people always come back to that, don't they? Those who value human life at whatever stage are painted as wild-eyed fanatics who would strip women of all their rights.

Well I oppose abortion for convenience, and I do not believe that infringes on any civil or inalienable right I possess. I have the right to become pregnant or not risk preganancy. My rights include a choice in whether to take the risk and include acceptance of the consequences for whatever risk I choose to take. I even have the right to ensure that I will never become pregant.

Once I accept the risk and become pregnant, I have willingly and knowingly accepted responsibility for the care and welfare of a passenger that will be with me hopefully for about nine months. Morally, I have no right to kill that passenger simply because it is inconvenient to have him/her on board.

Any other point of view makes no sense. If we believe fathers who assume the risk of fathering a child should have to accept the consequences of doing so whether or not they wanted a child, then mothers should be held to the same standard.

Very interesting, Foxyfyre. I have never heard pro-life put in quite that way. Gave me something else to chew on.

I have a problem with this statement:
>>My rights include a choice in whether to take the risk and include acceptance of the consequences for whatever risk I choose to take. I even have the right to ensure that I will never become pregant.<<<

Yes; women have been given legal rights to ensure we can choose when/if we become pregnant. We have also been given new opportunities to become educated on the issues and our bodies; as well as access to birth control methods.

The problem is that:
1) Rights are often violated (rape, no access to education/bc control, emotional/physical/mental abuse which makes the mother unfit and/or the child at risk)
2) A fully developed human simply has more legal rights in a community than a developing fetus. IMO: that is the way it should be. It is fully within a woman's right to choose to terminate a pregnancy within the boundaries of human sense. The majority of abortions are carried out within the first trimester. Ones that are not are 'emergency' or illegal.

thanks

0 Replies

Hey Snood, maybe we should form a club or something. Frank has defined both of us as liars. Probably more too. We could call it the Prevaricator Club. We could get a clubhouse and hats. Maybe even jackets. We gotta come up with a good motto. Since we are in different countries we could be called the Internation Prevaricator Club. Anybody want to join? Laughing

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
snood wrote:
Apisa:

Quote:
Fanatics like you would give imagined rights of eight cells priority over the rights of a grown woman

...and idiots like you want to conjur a clear delineation between an unborn child who has every feature a born one does except getting oxygen and nutrition through its face instead of umbilically.

I thought you were the person who only responds to provocation directed at you, Snood.

So...you are a liar as well as someone who continues to be a pot calling a kettle black.

Ouch!

...Well, now you really told me- huh, pops? C'mon ole geezer, we all know you're the biggest cheap shot taking lowlife here. And liar doesn't even begin to cover the depth of denial you're in about being the person who gets in the most silly disputes.

But why don't you address how stupid it is to equate "eight cells" with a fullterm baby? Is it because you can't really resolve such abyssmal idiocy, and you want to tapdance around it?

More childish rants from A2K's #1 poster of insults.

Poor fellow. That's about all he does. Post rants. Almost never anything of substance on an issue.

Well...to each his own.

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

Hey Snood, maybe we should form a club or something. Frank has defined both of us as liars.

Hey...I've also defined you two as posters in A2K...and you've never complained about that.

Quote:

Probably more too. We could call it the Prevaricator Club. We could get a clubhouse and hats. Maybe even jackets. We gotta come up with a good motto. Since we are in different countries we could be called the Internation Prevaricator Club. Anybody want to join?

I'm sure there will be others who will join. But I cannot think of two better suited individuals to found the club...that's for sure.

0 Replies

Thanks to Intrepid. I certainly can't argue against anything you've said and Frank seems to be unable to come up with anything but his worn record responses that are either unresponsive to what is said or they just parrot the party line. Snood seems to realize that too.

Flushd writes

Quote:

Very interesting, Foxyfyre. I have never heard pro-life put in quite that way. Gave me something else to chew on.

I have a problem with this statement:
>>My rights include a choice in whether to take the risk and include acceptance of the consequences for whatever risk I choose to take. I even have the right to ensure that I will never become pregant.<<<

Yes; women have been given legal rights to ensure we can choose when/if we become pregnant. We have also been given new opportunities to become educated on the issues and our bodies; as well as access to birth control methods.

The problem is that:
1) Rights are often violated (rape, no access to education/bc control, emotional/physical/mental abuse which makes the mother unfit and/or the child at risk)
2) A fully developed human simply has more legal rights in a community than a developing fetus. IMO: that is the way it should be. It is fully within a woman's right to choose to terminate a pregnancy within the boundaries of human sense. The majority of abortions are carried out within the first trimester. Ones that are not are 'emergency' or illegal.

thanks

If you have read the last quarter or half of the thread, you will see that I am not advocating making abortion illegal for any reason. I am not about to pass judgment on the choices a woman makes in cases of rape, incest, severely damaged development, multiple babies where fewer have a much better chance of survival, certain issues of her health, etc. It is not my prerogative to judge in such matters and I will leave that up to the conscience of the woman, her doctor, and, if she is a believer, her God.

I have no problem condemning the notion that killing unborn babies at any stage is an acceptable form of birth control. For me pro choice means carefully choosing how and when to take the risk of pregnancy.

In my view children, born or unborn, below the age of majority should have no rights whatsoever other than the inalienable rights that we are all born with, but they are entitled to expect to be clothed, fed, housed, educated, and otherwise cared for until the age of majority. Grown ups should not be allowed to misuse them abuse them, mistreat them, and certainly should not be allowed to kill them.

I see little difference between the newly born infant and that which has not yet emerged from the womb. Both are helpless and completely dependent on the adult for their survival. All children, born or unborn, should be wanted and loved, and responsible adults won't start one they don't intend to finish.

0 Replies

Apisa:

Quote:

More childish rants from A2K's #1 poster of insults.

Poor fellow. That's about all he does. Post rants. Almost never anything of substance on an issue.

Well...to each his own.

Geez, ole timer - you're really in a state of denial. Just count the insults on this one thread.

You regularly call half a dozen posters on this forum stupid, silly, ignorant, etc., etc.

I regularly insult no one but you.
You're terminally self-absorbed; you're not very interesting, but - you can count, can't you?

And about "never posting anything of substance" - you're two faced, and full of crap. I can produce a post where you are effusively praising my writing as possibly "the best ever" - how can both things be true? Nope, old geezer, you just say whatever you think paints the best picture of you at the time. Just a bunch of hot air trying to pontificate and appear above it all. You need a new act.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Apisa:

Quote:
More childish rants from A2K's #1 poster of insults.

Poor fellow. That's about all he does. Post rants. Almost never anything of substance on an issue.

Well...to each his own.

Geez, ole timer - you're really in a state of denial. Just count the insults on this one thread.

You regularly call half a dozen posters on this forum stupid, silly, ignorant, etc., etc.

I regularly insult no one but you.
You're terminally self-absorbed; you're not very interesting, but - you can count, can't you?

And about "never posting anything of substance" - you're two faced, and full of crap. I can produce a post where you are effusively praising my writing as possibly "the best ever" - how can both things be true? Nope, old geezer, you just say whatever you think paints the best picture of you at the time. Just a bunch of hot air trying to pontificate and appear above it all. You need a new act.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Temper, temper, temper.

Try to cool down. You're gonna pop a blood vessel.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Intrepid wrote:
Hey Snood, maybe we should form a club or something. Frank has defined both of us as liars.

Hey...I've also defined you two as posters in A2K...and you've never complained about that.

Quote:
Probably more too. We could call it the Prevaricator Club. We could get a clubhouse and hats. Maybe even jackets. We gotta come up with a good motto. Since we are in different countries we could be called the Internation Prevaricator Club. Anybody want to join?

I'm sure there will be others who will join. But I cannot think of two better suited individuals to found the club...that's for sure.

It says something about your character when you classify someone as a poster and also as a liar and see no difference in the labels.

I am sure others would join as well since you find a sick sense of accomplishment in characterizing people as such. Nobody has called you a liar... that is more because their character keeps them from doing so than that it could not be applied.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

I regularly insult no one but you.

Snoodie, Snoodie, Snoodie...

...yes...

...I have noticed that.

I wonder about that obssession.

Do you dream about me?

Do you get excited when you do, Snoodie?

You know...in a differnt setting, other people in that setting might look at your fascination with me and suggest that you are my b....

...well, we know what they might suggest you are.

Quote:

You're terminally self-absorbed; you're not very interesting, but - you can count, can't you?

And about "never posting anything of substance" - you're two faced, and full of crap. I can produce a post where you are effusively praising my writing as possibly "the best ever"

My guess is that at best, you can show ONE post where I mentioned that ONE OF YOUR POSTS was excellent.

It was.

I had no trouble complimenting you on that post. I'll reaffirm that impression here: Snood...that one post was EXCELLENT!

But for you to characterize that comment of mine as me effusively praising your writing as possibly the best ever...is so laughable, I have trouble accepting that you actually wrote those words.

Why don't you post here in this thread...every word I've ever written effusively praising your writing as the best ever...so everyone can have a laugh.

Quote:

- how can both things be true?

Both aren't!

Quote:

Nope, old geezer, you just say whatever you think paints the best picture of you at the time. Just a bunch of hot air trying to pontificate and appear above it all. You need a new act.

You know, Snoodie...I think I may have put my finger on what your problem with me is. If you really think I am all the things you have hurled my way in your childish rants during the last two weeks...

...perhaps the problem is that I remind you of yourself.

Yep!

The more I think over all the insults...if you think I am those things...I must remind you of yourself. Or at least...someone else you've interacted with in your life...who reminds you of yourself.

Mirrors can be scary to someone like you.

And you really shouldn't think that at all...because there are lots of major differnces...probably best illustrated by our names here in A2K.

Mine is "Frank". Frank means "forthrightness". I am frank....I am forthright.

Yours is Snood...which is the name for the hairnet that made Ruth Buzzy, Ruth Buzzy on Laugh In.

And the name fits you like a glove...or a hairnet, if you prefer.

You really ought to get over your problem.

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Intrepid wrote:
Hey Snood, maybe we should form a club or something. Frank has defined both of us as liars.

Hey...I've also defined you two as posters in A2K...and you've never complained about that.

Quote:
Probably more too. We could call it the Prevaricator Club. We could get a clubhouse and hats. Maybe even jackets. We gotta come up with a good motto. Since we are in different countries we could be called the Internation Prevaricator Club. Anybody want to join?

I'm sure there will be others who will join. But I cannot think of two better suited individuals to found the club...that's for sure.

It says something about your character when you classify someone as a poster and also as a liar and see no difference in the labels.

I am sure others would join as well since you find a sick sense of accomplishment in characterizing people as such. Nobody has called you a liar... that is more because their character keeps them from doing so than that it could not be applied.

Nah...cowards would do it...but they would do it in a back door way. Like you just did.

0 Replies

Can't see it, canya, old feller?

Well, it is harder and harder for folks your age to separate reality and imagination, so I can understand your not being able to understand how ridiculous you look- in so many skirmishes with so many people - and all the while pointing fingers at all of them as the ones in the wrong.

It's okay... poor old deluded apisa. Gum your oatmeal and you'll feel better.

0 Replies

Foxyfyre,
I did take the time to read through what you had written previously. I don't think I made any mistakes.

All in all, I can see where you are coming from and I respect your views. I myself agree that abortion is NOT a form of birth control. That is irresponsible and not what abortion is intended for.
I also agree that children deserve a good life once they are born; and that it is adult's responsibility to do everything possible to ensure them health, safety, and opportunities.

Where our opinions diverge is believing that there is no difference between an unborn child and a born child. I believe there is an appreciable difference.

I would dare to say that is at the crux at much arguement between people on both sides.

thx for taking the time to reply back, foxy

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Intrepid wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Intrepid wrote:
Hey Snood, maybe we should form a club or something. Frank has defined both of us as liars.

Hey...I've also defined you two as posters in A2K...and you've never complained about that.

Quote:
Probably more too. We could call it the Prevaricator Club. We could get a clubhouse and hats. Maybe even jackets. We gotta come up with a good motto. Since we are in different countries we could be called the Internation Prevaricator Club. Anybody want to join?

I'm sure there will be others who will join. But I cannot think of two better suited individuals to found the club...that's for sure.

It says something about your character when you classify someone as a poster and also as a liar and see no difference in the labels.

I am sure others would join as well since you find a sick sense of accomplishment in characterizing people as such. Nobody has called you a liar... that is more because their character keeps them from doing so than that it could not be applied.

Nah...cowards would do it...but they would do it in a back door way. Like you just did.

Are you calling me a coward, Frank? Are you calling me a liar again? Are you suggesting that I called you a liar? I did not. You are many things... many too disgusting to mention, but you are not a liar since a liar has to know that what they say is untrue. You, in your own pitiful way, think that everything you say is true. You hold yourself above others and ridicule at every opportunity. Perhaps your lack of real knowledge on real topics is disguised when you use your verbal attacks on folks. Being offensive is not a particularly desirable trait. You do this with anyone that does not share your opinion.

0 Replies

ABORTION.......

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know