Have you noticed how Pro abortion people say that abortions should be rare?

MayCaesar

Smoking cigarettes and getting a lung cancer as a result is also a hard thing to go through. I guess cigarettes are alive then! Well done, my friend.

You should also note that WRITING WITH CAPS LOCK ON DOES NOT MAKE YOUR ARGUMENT STRONGER AND JUST MAKES YOU LOOK EMOTIONALLY WEAKER.

Plaffelvohfen

Most pro-choice might say that (that it should be rare), but it's the physical ordeal that many talk about, and it's usually with regards to late term abortions (the later an abortion is performed, the harder it is on the body, including postpartum physiological and mental affects )...

There's no denying that the moral dilemma is an ordeal for many too, it is a morally charged problem after all...

But no one except the pregnant woman has the right (or even maybe the obligation?) to solve this problem by herself, and learn to assume her decision.

Grafix

@We_are_accountable ;- Great arguments, indeed, pointing out in stark contrast the hypocrisy of the bought, sold and paid for leftosphere's paradigm and diabolical Agenda to sell us all out, selling downstream the very foundations of our cultural civility.  The arguments which clearly delineate the left's hypocrisy, which I particularly love, I've highlighted in bold text.

If that unborn baby is but a clump of cells, why should abortions be rare?

If it's a living growing human life (which Science declares it to be), then it should be protected by laws just as your life is protected.

Then Pro abortion fanatics will say it should be rare because abortion is a hard thing for women to go through. WHY?

If it's but a clump of cells, why is abortion hard for a woman to go through?

If it's a living growing human life, THEN OF COURSE KILLING IT IS A HARD THING TO GO THROUGH!

The truth is that many women experience severe guilt and depression after an abortion. Why if it is but a bunch of cells?

We have laws protecting your life, and we make it hard for others to kill you! UNDERSTAND?

The utter selfish depravity from those on the Left shows how dictators over the ages come to be. Dictators always single out a group of people who are inconvenient to them, and make laws legalizing their deaths.

When you scream at pro life people, telling them to stay out of a woman's body, WE DO!

It's the other body inside of her we want to protect from those who would kill for sake of convenience.

We will tell you the same thing...STAY OUT OF THAT BABY'S BODY!

Grafix

@Plaffelvohfen - You wrote:

Most pro-choice might say that (that it should be rare), but it's the physical ordeal that many talk about, and it's usually with regards to late term abortions (the later an abortion is performed, the harder it is on the body, including postpartum physiological and mental affects )...

The evidence doesn't support this fake cop-out, though.  I am not disagreeing with the obvious fact that there is greater physical trauma  the later the abortion. That's an obvious empirically observable fact.  I am saying that the impact of guilt, mental anguish and depression on account of the moral dilemma is no greater in incidence for late term abortions than for early term. In this para your transparent attempt to adroitly deflect the issue of the guilt factor across to the physical factor is disingenuous.  Nice sleight of argument, but unfortunately for you and these women, the fact is the guilt is unrelated to the bodily trauma and why should it be related?  The two are not associated in any way.  The statistics show the timing of the abortion has no bearing on the guilt factor.

Then the hypocrisy of this feigned self-righteous, sanctimonious morality and virtue signalling of some kind of moral high ground is truly cringe-worthy ...

But no one except the pregnant woman has the right (or even maybe the obligation?) to solve this problem by herself, and learn to assume her decision.

This is where the left is heading, headlong into an abyss of moral crises, irresponsibility, dependency on the State, marching into moral bankruptcy.  It should be the responsibility of both parents.  The responsibility that comes with parenting is to protect, nurture and grow tender new lives.  That responsibility rests on their  shoulders.  No-one else's.  It is not the State's business to stick its nose into our bedrooms, our toilets, our panties or our uterus.  Get over it.  It is the State's business to oversee the Will of the People, the law and the law clearly states that murder is a felony.  

The argument of the left is completely illogical and contradictory.  It goes like this:  Whaaa!!  You pro-lifers stay out of our bodies. (We don't get into them.  The abortionists do.)  Whaaa!!  You pro-lifers it's the mother's decision and nothing to do with you.  (No it's not.  Killing is the Court's jurisdiction.)    Whaaa!!!  The State has every right to legislate and tell us it's OK. (No it doesn't.  It is violating the Constitituion.)   Whaaa!!  You pro-lifers can't tell the State what we can and can't do with our bodies. (We the People most certainly CAN tell the State what to do.  It is our servant.  The Will of We the People is we don't condone murder or infanticide.)   Whaaa!! You Pro-Lifers, it's none of your damned business  (It is when you abortionists seek to make it Law.  Have you forgotten that We are the people?.  The State is our servant.  What part of that don't lefties understand?)

So ... what's the wash-up?  Spoilt little bratish Lefties angling by way of sleight of hand, to legislate by leftie autocracy  and bugger everyone else.  Their narrative is odious and insidiously dishonest, bawling that we keep our noses out of what they want to do with their bodies, that it is none of our business, but in the same breath making it our business by appealing to the State to legislate on it.  Can't have it both ways, Sunshine.  It's sneaky, low-down, gutter politicking of the most craven order, sliding autocratic rule in through the back door to bully those who disagree with their fake moralizing, fake virtue signalling and fake sanctimonious, self-righteous moral high ground bull crap and subterfuge.  There is no moral high ground, only insidious depravity.  It ain't on, Sunshine, not in my State, your State or any State, unless We the People endorse such legislation.  Got that?

TKDB

@We_are_accountable

I'm pro Adoption.

Grafix

We_are_accountable

@Grafix

Thanks, you make great points in your posts.

We_are_accountable

@TKDB

I agree with you. Adoption should be the choice for a person who does not want their baby.
These people who choose to have sex with those they do not love, taking a chance of getting pregnant, are going to have to deal with their irresponsibility, and deliver a baby. Their choice!

That's the choice society should be talking about. We all have the choice to say no to sex. You want to make sure you do not get pregnant? Say NO, or use birth control. This is not rocket science.

Ampersand

An abortion and specifically a surgical abortion which is what most people refer to when they talk about abortion (even though that only constitutes a minority of them) is pretty much a plan C, so ideally you'd want plan A or plan B to work.

Plan A in this case is not getting pregnant, plan B is catching it early and taking a pill to abort the pregnancy and plan C is the fallback option if that chance is missed.

It's obviously far easier on the woman of the fetus is either never created or aborted with a minimum of fuss than having to have an invasive procedure.

In terms of their personal feelings that varies by women but largely women who have had abortions (even surgical ones) are positive about them.

ZeusAres42

@We_are_accountable

No, science does not declare life begins at conception. It has now been pointed out to you time and time again with actual science how and ontological individual life does not begins at conception. It has also been pointed out that life, in general, does not begin at conception; It begins before conception. Thus you continue to state that life does begin at conception and thus continue to deny the overwhelming amount of science that contradicts the notion that life begins at conception.

So, I think it's abundantly clear now who out of you and the rest of us providing you with valid scientific resources who the actual science Denier is. Denying science and lying about what science says does nothing to advance your argument.

MichaelElpers

@ZeusAres42. Human life doesnt begin until conception.  It is at this moment when traits of a human are decided.  This is also the moment when someone can trace their existence back to a single entity.

From this moment until your 20s you are a developing human.

We_are_accountable

@ZeusAres42

Science has declared that human life begins at conception. To deny this does not deserve any further debate because no mater what I say, you wll simply deny it.

AlofRI

Have you noticed how pro life people say that abortions should not exist?
Have you noticed that pro life people say that they have the right to control any woman's body … in so many words?
Have you noticed that pro life people (mostly), want our Constitution to be based on Biblical principles even though others have the same freedom of religion?
Have you noticed that pro life people think THEY have rights, and others do not? …. unless, of course, they agree with pro lifers …...

AlofRI

We_are_accountable said:

@ZeusAres42

Science has declared that human life begins at conception. To deny this does not deserve any further debate because no mater what I say, you wll simply deny it.

Strange. All of a sudden this one scientific declaration becomes Gospel to some, when other scientific declarations become just a false and theory that some made up? (A "deniable" theory).
This is a theory that a few scientists believe, and many disagree with, or at least point out that it depends on what one's idea of what "life" consists of. 
"Living tissue" is not "a life" to many. To some it is. I guess that becomes a deniable theory?? Do YOU "simply deny" this?

We_are_accountable

@AlofRI

No, the only thing I notice is to how most of your remarks are anti Christian lies and distortion.

TKDB

Abortion appears to be an Atheist talking point?

AlofRI

I have NEVER been anti-Christian (or anti Jew or anti Muslim or anti religion, actually), I am anti-some-Christians, I am anti-some-Jews, I am anti-some Muslims just as I am anti-some people. Still, I am open to liking, even loving some of any of the above. It's abusers I don't like. Those that abuse their religions, that twist their faith into just exactly what they want it to be, while the majority of others, just as faithful, do not want it YOUR way.

Religion(s) to me are a necessary thing to many people and I accept that … unlike SOME atheists. Using it to guide your life is okay with me, no objection at all. Using it to say YOU must live as I say, follow the rules of MY religion, follow MY beliefs … is where I draw the line. 

As you well know, I have one daughter that is Baptist, one that is Catholic, two that are, at least, agnostic. I do not hold their religions  or beliefs against them (or their spouses or their children), If they want to say Grace before a meal, that's okay with me. If they want to say "Good friends, good meat, good God, let's eat!" That's okay too. ;-) 
No, I am NOT anti-religion, I am anti-some-people-who-abuse-their-religion.

 To @TKDB , Abortion seems to be a Christian talking point, also, doesn't it?  I only talk about it when somebody brings it up .. usually a radical "Christian".

TKDB

@AlofRI

I'm pro ADOPTION, regardless if someone is an Atheist, or a Religious person.

"To @TKDB , Abortion seems to be a Christian talking point, also, doesn't it?  I only talk about it when somebody brings it up .. usually a radical "Christian". "

Because any Atheist or Religious person can use CONTRACEPTIVES, to avoid creating an unintended fetus can't they?

TKDB

@AlofRI

Do you agree with these values as being Atheist values?

"Atheistic values

 Atheistic values are the values displayed by atheists. They are a stark contrast to Christian Values, and include:

• desperate clinging to the unfounded belief in the non-existence of God and the total rejection of morality
• typically a preference for socialism or communism
• opposition to any mention of the Lord in public school
• support for the theory of evolution
• support for abortion
• denial of the value of the Bible
• secularization of society (e.g. language, holidays, government)
• hostility toward organized religion and religious people
• moral relativism "  

ZeusAres42

@We_are_accountable

We_are_accountable said:

@ZeusAres42

To deny this does not deserve any further debate because no mater what I say, you wll simply deny it.

Great description of yourself there. Were you looking in a mirror when you wrote this? Your denial in the face of blatant evidence and arguments continuous arguments from ignorance and emotional appeals are not arguments. You obviously don't value and respect science either.

ZeusAres42

We_are_accountable said:

@AlofRI

No, the only thing I notice is to how most of your remarks are anti Christian lies and distortion.

@We_are_accountable, since you talk of Christianity and guessing you are religious then let me appeal to that side of you by asking if you think a soul can split into multiple different souls?

ZeusAres42

MichaelElpers said:

@ZeusAres42. Human life doesnt begin until conception.  It is at this moment when traits of a human are decided.  This is also the moment when someone can trace their existence back to a single entity.

From this moment until your 20s you are a developing human.

@MichaelElpers

Although the opinion that life begins at fertilization is the most popular view among the public, many scientists no longer support this position, as an increasing number of scientific discoveries seem to contradict it. One such discovery in the last twenty years is that research has shown that there is no "moment of fertilization" at all. Scientists now choose to view fertilization as a process that occurs over a period of 12-24 hours.

http://science.jburroughs.org/mbahe/BioEthics/Articles/Whendoeshumanlifebegin.pdf

MichaelElpers

@ZeusAres42. 
If the biggest contradiction you found is that fertilization process is not instantaneous, it still contradicts your view as that would imply they believe life starts after the process...which is basically conception.

ZeusAres42

MichaelElpers said:

@ZeusAres42. 
If the biggest contradiction you found is that fertilization process is not instantaneous, it still contradicts your view as that would imply they believe life starts after the process...which is basically conception.

@MichaelElpers

What view is that again? One of my views is in alignment with the science that states human life and life in general begins before conception; not at the point of a specific time after. For example, eggs are alive, sperm is alive, cells are alive and more. This also agrees with reason considering these things need to be alive in order to create new living entities.

Hypr

@MayCaesar it wasn’t just the basis that because it is a hard thing to go through it is the idea that the “clump of cells” is still a human being no matter what. You and I are a “clump of cells” as well. Granted a lot more developed but we are still originated from those same clump of cells. Should it not be treated as a life?

MichaelElpers

@ZeusAres42 They are alive but not human life.