5 minutes ago, NOTW said:

Ah, clap emoji.  Powerful.  

Yeah, my first time using that one! 

 

 

5 minutes ago, NOTW said:

You still take risk.  You know that having sex can result in having a baby, the "choice" is in having sex and risking getting pregnant, getting an STD.   If a woman is that poor or scared of having a baby that she would kill the baby and go through a medical procedure to get rid of it and she values not having to deal with a baby over the life of that baby so much...then don't let him finish inside you.  Or double your protection: be on birth control pills, and use a condom.  Or have him pull out.  Or do other things to get off.  But people are irresponsible and then want to throw away the life of a baby because they can't afford it, or they aren't ready for a baby in their life right now.  Let's also talk about women that have more than 1 abortion in their life.  At what point does the pro choice argument hold people accountable for getting pregnant in the first place.  

 

I just think it's a different animal than. Like has been said previously, people generally don't go through these well-calculated rationalizations before sex.


 

Quote

Or have him pull out. 

You...you know that's not effective, right?

1 minute ago, DaEagles4Life said:

Planned Parenthood is doing exactly what you want done. 

And I don't have a problem with that.  What are you arguing with me about? 

I've said repeatedly I'm in favor of more education around prevention, and resources like free birth control.  Planned Parenthood has a perception of pushing abortion like an agenda and not equally promoting adoption, whether that's factual or false that's how a lot of people who are against them perceive.

2 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

Yeah, my first time using that one! 

I just think it's a different animal than. Like has been said previously, people don't go through these well-calculated rationalizations before sex.

You...you know that's not effective, right?

I'm just saying if these women are THAT scared of getting pregnant, that they would not care about killing the baby because having a child in their life is worse...then try some extra measures.  

People should be well educated enough on these risks.  We all take health class in high school.  People know what can happen when you get pregnant.  They're not dumb.  They are careless and get in the moment and don't use birth control.  If they do and it doesn't work, they still know there is risk.  

1 minute ago, NOTW said:

I'm just saying if these women are THAT scared of getting pregnant, that they would not care about killing the baby because having a child in their life is worse...then try some extra measures.  

People should be well educated enough on these risks.  We all take health class in high school.  People know what can happen when you get pregnant.  They're not dumb.  They are careless and get in the moment and don't use birth control.  If they do and it doesn't work, they still know there is risk.  

Then how many weeks to you do you consider it a baby? 

34 minutes ago, NOTW said:

If pro lifers backed off trying to overturn Roe, and said let's focus on prevention, we'll agree to fund more education and programs that teach prevention, provide free birth control, but also include equal information and resources about adoption not only abortion I wonder if pro choicers would agree.  Seems the pro choice argument is always about choice...for killing the baby but you don't hear about keeping the baby and adoption.  

This is the solution I think most Americans would be ok with, if not in total agreement with.

I also think the adoption process is very difficult, and I think there is too much deference given to the biological parents in many cases. One of the fears prospective adoptive parents I know have shared with me is that they could go through a very expensive and invasive process of adopting a baby only to lose that baby in a few years after the mom is on her feet. I don't know how rational that fear is to be honest, but I know it's something  they've shared as a concern. Closed adoptions are out of fashion, but give the best potential outcomes to the kids even if the birth mother may have to deal with some emotional trauma. 

14 minutes ago, NOTW said:

I realize that, it was a hypothetical.  "If" the pro life side were to try and meet in the middle, would the pro choice side as well?  

meh...doubtful.

i don't think many pro-choicers are against sex education and availability of contraceptives. it's the opposing side i'm not so sure about. 

14 minutes ago, NOTW said:

Ah, clap emoji.  Powerful.  

You still take risk.  You know that having sex can result in having a baby, the "choice" is in having sex and risking getting pregnant, getting an STD.   If a woman is that poor or scared of having a baby that she would kill the baby and go through a medical procedure to get rid of it and she values not having to deal with a baby over the life of that baby so much...then don't let him finish inside you.  Or double your protection: be on birth control pills, and use a condom.  Or have him pull out.  Or do other things to get off.  But people are irresponsible and then want to throw away the life of a baby because they can't afford it, or they aren't ready for a baby in their life right now.  Let's also talk about women that have more than 1 abortion in their life.  At what point does the pro choice argument hold people accountable for getting pregnant in the first place.  

well, i'd love to farg...but i'm just too poor.  sorry!  

6 hours ago, Bill said:

Side bar: is abortion abhorrent and murder in the case of rape/incest?

Is it still murder? IMO, yes. I guess the equivalent would be killing someone in a war -- you're killing someone, but there is the idea of a just war that justifies such things. 

35 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

That would be great, but that's never going to be the position of the pro-lifers.  Like DEagle brought up, pro-lifers want to dismantle Planned Parenthood, which is one of the largest contributors to education and prevention.  They're doing the opposite of what you're proposing.  Abortion is the most dug-in of all dug-in political foxholes and it's the driving force for most of the support of one major party.  There's almost certainly no middle ground to be found here.

Yeah, it is the Pro-Life team that won't agree.  Certainly the lion's share of them.

11 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

You...you know that's not effective, right?

5 minutes ago, DaEagles4Life said:

Then how many weeks to you do you consider it a baby? 

I don't know what that has to do with what you quoted, but I believe it's at conception when the sperm joins the egg.  

2 hours ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

 

Many? Something like 20% spend five years or more in foster care, so the numbers are not exactly good. Ultimately, I think that the state should not be intervening in matters of personal health like this and Roe does a good job of breaking down the accessibility of abortion according to gestational periods. So, in the first trimester when it is literally a tiny mass of cells, you can get an abortion if you choose. Beyond that, the argument is a little more valid that it is something more substantial and akin to a life that would require a doctor's approval as medically necessary.

 

 

Not all people who need an abortion are necessarily making "poor choices."  Birth control methods can fail, and in some cases, pregnancy itself can endanger the life of the mother. I don't think most people are sociopaths, but they are incredibly irresponsible, and in this case, it is going to be the kids living in poverty or broken homes who suffer the most. I don't generally mind letting people suffer consequences for their own actions, but in this case, it's not just the parents who would be suffering. I think that if the state is going to force people to give birth, then it should also provide the necessary means for these kids to be healthy and productive members of society. The reality, though, is that if abortion is more widely available, you will have less kids on the welfare rolls that you detest.

Once again, I am pro-choice. But I have 0.0% issue with kids suffering from the poor choices of their parents, because I can admit that life isn't fair. And yes, they are poor choices even if birth control fails. If you're broke and wanna bang, you're taking risk. It is what it is. 

But seriously, I'm all for morons having abortions. The population is already stupid enough.

3 minutes ago, mr_hunt said:

well, i'd love to farg...but i'm just too poor.  sorry!  

Be less poor, Hunt, and maybe you'll get laid occasionally.

3 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Is it still murder? IMO, yes

At what point?  Conception?  Some other time interval post conception?  Something else?

Just now, DrPhilly said:

At what point?  Conception?  Some other time interval post conception?  Something else?

My personal opinion is aborting a fetus at any time is murder. That's my PERSONAL opinion and not want I want the law to say. 

I'm really curious/nervous to see what happens to abortion care and research when Warren Buffett dies. Dude donates massive sums to the field. 

1 minute ago, NOTW said:

I don't know what that has to do with what you quoted, but I believe it's at conception when the sperm joins the egg.  

So you can't even have a conversation with someone that is pro choice and to me this is based off your beliefs.

Ultimately, you are using your religion to push it on to other people whether you want to admit it or not. 

Just now, vikas83 said:

My personal opinion is aborting a fetus at any time is murder. That's my PERSONAL opinion and not want I want the law to say. 

Ok, understood.  So then use of the morning after pill is murder in your personal opinion, correct.  Note: I'm not looking to argue with you but I am interested in understanding your position.

6 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

This is the solution I think most Americans would be ok with, if not in total agreement with.

I also think the adoption process is very difficult, and I think there is too much deference given to the biological parents in many cases. One of the fears prospective adoptive parents I know have shared with me is that they could go through a very expensive and invasive process of adopting a baby only to lose that baby in a few years after the mom is on her feet. I don't know how rational that fear is to be honest, but I know it's something  they've shared as a concern. Closed adoptions are out of fashion, but give the best potential outcomes to the kids even if the birth mother may have to deal with some emotional trauma. 

There are different state laws about it.  I have friends who adopted a boy years ago.  The mother was in a state where she had I think a week or so to change her mind.  The adoptive parents purchase baby items, get the room ready, get emotionally invested but were tense not knowing if the girl would change her mind.

2 years later, that same woman got pregnant again.  She didn't want a baby, but still had unprotected sex irresponsibly and got pregnant again.  She thought about keeping the baby, then changed her mind 2 months from delivery and contacted them to see if they wanted to also adopt her girl. They agreed and adopted so the brother and sister could be together.  

 

4 minutes ago, DaEagles4Life said:

Ultimately, you are using your religion to push it on to other people whether you want to admit it or not. 

Exactly. This is really where the argument starts and stops for me. The vast majority of pro-lifers are trying to use their personal religious precepts to make law. It has no place in our society.

2 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Ok, understood.  So then use of the morning after pill is murder in your personal opinion, correct.  Note: I'm not looking to argue with you but I am interested in understanding your position.

Maybe murder is too strong a word, but yes -- I think it is immoral.

1 minute ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

In a similar vein

Exactly. This is really where the argument starts and stops for me. The vast majority of pro-lifers trying to use their personal religious precepts to make law. It has no place in our society.

On this, we completely agree. 

2 minutes ago, DaEagles4Life said:

So you can't even have a conversation with someone that is pro choice and to me this is based off your beliefs.

Ultimately, you are using your religion to push it on to other people whether you want to admit it or not. 

The bolded:  what?  I'm having conversations the last 2 days in here with pro choice people.  

I'm not using my religion to push anything on anyone, you keep pulling from the jar of pro choice talking points.  Oh yeah, what about people who attack Planned Parenthood?!  Um, yeah I'm against that why are you bringing that up to me.  Weird.

Stating my personal belief that life begins at conception was answering your question to me, I didn't state anything about pushing anything on other people.  If you read what I said yesterday, I said pro lifers should stop trying to overturn Roe v Wade as it won't stop anything.  I said they should focus on prevention, education and free birth control and try to reduce the problem.

 

2 minutes ago, NOTW said:

The bolded:  what?  I'm having conversations the last 2 days in here with pro choice people.  

I'm not using my religion to push anything on anyone, you keep pulling from the jar of pro choice talking points.  Oh yeah, what about people who attack Planned Parenthood?!  Um, yeah I'm against that why are you bringing that up to me.  Weird.

Stating my personal belief that life begins at conception was answering your question to me, I didn't state anything about pushing anything on other people.  If you read what I said yesterday, I said pro lifers should stop trying to overturn Roe v Wade as it won't stop anything.  I said they should focus on prevention, education and free birth control and try to reduce the problem.

 

tldr NOTW wants the US to be remade in the image of the Handmaid's Tale and supports attacks against abortion clinics! 

10 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Ok, understood.  So then use of the morning after pill is murder in your personal opinion, correct.  Note: I'm not looking to argue with you but I am interested in understanding your position.

It's my understanding that the core constituency of pro-life advocates do not support the use of products like Plan B. They consider it to be abortion.

11 minutes ago, NOTW said:

The bolded:  what?  I'm having conversations the last 2 days in here with pro choice people.  

I'm not using my religion to push anything on anyone, you keep pulling from the jar of pro choice talking points.  Oh yeah, what about people who attack Planned Parenthood?!  Um, yeah I'm against that why are you bringing that up to me.  Weird.

Stating my personal belief that life begins at conception was answering your question to me, I didn't state anything about pushing anything on other people.  If you read what I said yesterday, I said pro lifers should stop trying to overturn Roe v Wade as it won't stop anything.  I said they should focus on prevention, education and free birth control and try to reduce the problem.

 

I'm pro keeping religion out of my life, not pro life or pro choice. As you said this isn't you personally, but ultimately this is the what it comes down to. 

 

Having a common sense answer on abortion is not the second the sperm goes into the egg nor is allowing 3rd trimester abortions. 

Has to be a middle ground where people can agree on that only at the mothers health should an abortion happen. Now is it 17 weeks or up to 23 weeks like Canada has their abortion laws. That is where the answer lies not the extremes. 

1 hour ago, NOTW said:

If pro lifers backed off trying to overturn Roe, and said let's focus on prevention, we'll agree to fund more education and programs that teach prevention, provide free birth control, but also include equal information and resources about adoption not only abortion I wonder if pro choicers would agree.  Seems the pro choice argument is always about choice...for killing the baby but you don't hear about keeping the baby and adoption.  

Because you're not listening. Maybe you don't need the messaging about carrying a baby to adoption, because you aren't one that will ever have to carry a baby. 

Adoption isn't being attacked by politicians, courts, and government.

1 hour ago, DaEagles4Life said:

I wonder who are the people that attack Planned Parenthood 

Planned Parenthood does far more than provide education and resources about abortion, contraception, etc. 

They are providing prenatal care to women! Even when they decide to keep the baby. Or adoption. Whatever they decide happens to the baby.

In addition they provide health screenings, cancer screening, STD treatment and prevention... They are a woman's health service provider, and in some cases may be the only doctor a woman sees during the year.

Pro-Lifers attack Planned Parenthood as an abortion provider, as if the abortion procedure is a separate issue than women's health. These issues are tied together. They can't take away women's right to choose without inserting the law into a woman's health decision. It is forcing government to make health choices, instead of people deciding what's best for their health.