Abortion logic is whack

[ QUOTE ]
pro-abortion: Its going to happen anyways, better to take place in a tax-payer funded clinic then a back alley with a coat hanger

[/ QUOTE ]

Using this line of logic, it would be better to make tax fraud legal, since tax fraud is going to happen anyways. It would be better to make murder legal, since murder is going to happen anyways.

[ QUOTE ]
Anti-abortion: Its wrong to have an abortion because it violates God's law

[/ QUOTE ]

Using this line of logic, poker would be illegal [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]. The intracacies of US law shouldn't be dictated by an interpretation of the Bible. God forbid it was dictated by Islam, else adios Jews...(hmm, after thinking about this, no pun intended)

[ QUOTE ]
Pro-Abortion: Theyre just clumps of cells anyways, its not like you're killing a real human being.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.mttu.com/abort-pics/ Look at these pictures and tell me those aren't human beings. I'd venture a guess that the one's with arms, legs, and noses could move around and feel pain, too. Just a guess, though.

[ QUOTE ]
Pro-Abortion: Abortion as an option creates more sexual deviance/promiscuity leading to the moral breakdown of society

[/ QUOTE ]

People [censored]! By outlawing abortion law you don't eliminate desire, and almost certainly not their actions (a US savings rate of 1% shows exactly how much Americans want what gives them pleasure NOW and could care less about LATER, and we're talking the universally most desirable thing on the planet in history, and what most of you jerk off to every night!)

[ QUOTE ]
Pro-Abortion: Women sometimes are not financially capable yet to care for a child

[/ QUOTE ]

By this line of logic, a woman should be able to kill her 3 month old child if she is poor or loses her job, since she won't be financially capable of properly raising the child with all the material wealth a human being naturally deserves.

That makes 3 ridiculous lines of thinking to 2 ridiculous lines of thinking. What further tips the scales for me to side against abortion is simple - killing is killing. That's not religious doctrine speaking, thats just a personal thing against killing. I'm against killing, especially humans. (speaking of which, why is it generally that people who support federal and state funding of killing humans (abortion) tend to disagree with federal and state funding of killing humans (execution of convicted murderers?)

[newfant]

You religious nuts could go a long ways towards ending abortions if you would support funding for providing low-income people with condoms and the morning-after pill instead of forcing abstinence down everyone's throat.

[ QUOTE ]
You religious nuts could go a long ways towards ending abortions if you would support funding for providing low-income people with condoms and the morning-after pill instead of forcing abstinence down everyone's throat.

[/ QUOTE ]

He's a religious nut yet the only time he mentions God, and bible he uses it in a way to hurt his conclusion.


Btw, I think this is a typo. Pro-Abortion should be Anti-Abortion

[ QUOTE ]
Pro-Abortion: Abortion as an option creates more sexual deviance/promiscuity leading to the moral breakdown of society

[/ QUOTE ]

Newfant, what you've just wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response, in which you concluded that I am a religious nut who proposes abstinence, were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

[quinn]

[ QUOTE ]
You religious nuts could go a long ways towards ending abortions if you would support funding for providing low-income people with condoms and the morning-after pill instead of forcing abstinence down everyone's throat.

[/ QUOTE ]

The morning-after pill is abortion, because at the point that the morning-after pill is taken, all requirements for a child to be born have been satisfied (there is physical potential).

[Colonel Kataffy]

[ QUOTE ]
The morning-after pill is abortion, because at the point that the morning-after pill is taken, all requirements for a child to be born have been satisfied (there is physical potential).


[/ QUOTE ]

No, not true. Get thee to a biology book. Just so you know, conception doesn't necessarily occur before the morning after pill is taken.

[Autocratic]

Pro-abortion would be someone who supports abortion as much as possible. While I'm sure some idiots believe that liberals would love this, the reality is that we're pro-choice, as much as it apparently hurts you to use the term. After all, we let you get away with the ridiculous "pro-life" characterization.

Abortion is not an issue about politics and economics at its heart. It's about whether or not we're going to believe that a fetus, especially in its earlier stages, is equivalent to a human being upon being born and after. In my mind, the issue is what exactly makes humanity so exceptional? Is it a beating heart and the right number of chromosomes? Or is it loving friends, family, emotions, enormous mental capacity, the promise of the future and the memory of the past? Even an infant has a loving family and has begun a rapid mental growth. A third week fetus has none of these things, and that is why I am pro-choice.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
A third week fetus has none of these things, and that is why I am pro-choice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then hopefully you realize this is a subjective line in the sand. And that being the case, there is no reason that the voters of each state shouldnt be allowed to decide where their line in the sand should be drawn. And thus you are in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade, no?

[Autocratic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A third week fetus has none of these things, and that is why I am pro-choice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then hopefully you realize this is a subjective line in the sand. And that being the case, there is no reason that the voters of each state shouldnt be allowed to decide where their line in the sand should be drawn. And thus you are in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade, no?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it should be overturned on Constitutional grounds, absolutely. But none of what I described was realistically subjective.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A third week fetus has none of these things, and that is why I am pro-choice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then hopefully you realize this is a subjective line in the sand. And that being the case, there is no reason that the voters of each state shouldnt be allowed to decide where their line in the sand should be drawn. And thus you are in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade, no?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it should be overturned on Constitutional grounds, absolutely. But none of what I described was realistically subjective.

[/ QUOTE ]

Youre list of of characteristics of life is completely subjective, I dont know how you can say otherwise. And in fact, you are arguing what you believe to be personhood, not life per se. Life begins at conception, and even medical science, specifically embryology, supports this assertion. So if, like I do, you believe human life is something to be preserved and only purposefully ended under exceptional circumstances, than you shouldnt support abortion on demand. But if you want abortion based on personhood, then you get into that whole subjectivity thing again.

And before anyone asks, I dont support the death penalty, although it is a close call for me.