Abortion

[Marisa]

You would do better to stick to facts rather than demonizing your debate opponents. You are using histrionics. I'm using logic. Universal tolerance of abortion plus universal consent for/choice for abortion would likely require governments to institute abortion quotas and tactics in response. In China, something similar has already occurred!

No dear, you're not using logic. You're using emotional blackmail, and there isn't a whole lot less logical than that.

Abortion quotas? ROFLOLPIMP That's got to be the funniest thing I've heard all day.

Nice misrepresentation of China's policy, which states that each family is allowed ONE CHILD. Yes, they do engage in forced abortion, however that's AFTER A COUPLE HAS HAD A CHILD ALREADY. So pardon me if I don't share your certitude that the human race is going to cease to breed any time soon.

 

[Marisa]

This sounds like mere fear mongering.
What am I missing?

Billiard's apparent disbelief in climate change as reality?

 

[viole]

May I try a different tack?

If you are pro-choice, what might change your stance?

I can only think of a brain stroke that turns me into a conservative Christian.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Revoltingest]

I can only think of a brain stroke that turns me into a conservative Christian.

Ciao

- viole

What a scary thought.....I'm a broken blood vessel away from becoming Jimmy Swaggart!

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You would do better to stick to facts rather than demonizing your debate opponents. You are using histrionics. I'm using logic. Universal tolerance of abortion plus universal consent for/choice for abortion would likely require governments to institute abortion quotas and tactics in response. In China, something similar has already occurred!

The pro-choice position is just as opposed to forced abortion as it is to abortion bans.

 

[leibowde84]

May I try a different tack?

If you are pro-choice, what might change your stance?

A valid legal argument. I have yet to hear one, which makes me think that pro-lifers are stuck on the straw man that this is an issue confined to morality.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

May I try a different tack?

If you are pro-choice, what might change your stance?

Money talks. Make sure pregnant women have a lot of money. Like lap of luxury kind of money. Like Kardashian kind of money. Pro-life folks want women to see themselves as breeders first and foremost before having agency over their own reproductive health.

That's gotta come with a cost-benefit ratio that goes in the pregnant women's favor.

Now me? I'll take what I need and then funnel the rest of the money into compulsory comprehensive sex education, easy access to contraceptives, and a very solid secular-based education.

Typically? That lowers abortion rates in a manner that works that makes everybody happy. I'll switch sides then.

Problem solved. I earned my "open mind" credentials and brownie points.

Ok. Your turn. What would make you change your mind?

 

[Sundance]

Do you understand the pro-choice argument? It says that all women are allowed to make their own choice. Why would I ever argue against women being equal to men in that capacity? Just asking this question reveals that you haven't a clue what you're arguing against. It strongly suggests that you also may not have any idea what you're arguing for.

Though this question is not specifically addressed to me, dear Marisa, I will say that I now understand the basic argument of the pro-choice side of the debate, which is simply “regardless of how you personally feel, you should allow women to make their own choices in their reproductive health”. If that's the argument being put out by that side of the debate, then as a libertarian, I really can't argue against that.

 

[SomeRandom]

May I try a different tack?

If you are pro-choice, what might change your stance?

Pro CHOICE is the stance that every human being regardless of sex should be able to choose what they do with their own lives and bodies. Why would pro choice people be in favor of restricting a consensual adult choice and medical procedure? I don't think many of them favor dictatorship, however slight.

 

[Marisa]

Though this question is not specifically addressed to me, dear Marisa, I will say that I now understand the basic argument of the pro-choice side of the debate, which is simply “regardless of how you personally feel, you should allow women to make their own choices in their reproductive health”. If that's the argument being put out by that side of the debate, then as a libertarian, I really can't argue against that.

That is the argument.

 

[Marisa]

Pro CHOICE is the stance that every human being regardless of sex should be able to choose what they do with their own lives and bodies. Why would pro choice people be in favor of restricting a consensual adult choice and medical procedure? I don't think many of them favor dictatorship, however slight.

Correct. And as a feminist, I'm not interested in telling women who make different choices than I do that they are the wrong choices. ANY choice is only the wrong choice when the person making that choice believes that this should be the only choice available for all women. When that is the case, there is no choice. Choice, by definition, implies multiple options.

 

[BilliardsBall]

A good compelling argument that shows no abortion ever is the best route to take.

I think abortions are appropriate when helping the life of the mother--so I think you have made the field a bit narrow here. Perhaps we might start with "many abortions (as individual choices) are not the best route(s) to take..."

 

[BilliardsBall]

No dear, you're not using logic. You're using emotional blackmail, and there isn't a whole lot less logical than that.

Abortion quotas? ROFLOLPIMP That's got to be the funniest thing I've heard all day.

Nice misrepresentation of China's policy, which states that each family is allowed ONE CHILD. Yes, they do engage in forced abortion, however that's AFTER A COUPLE HAS HAD A CHILD ALREADY. So pardon me if I don't share your certitude that the human race is going to cease to breed any time soon.

Sorry, was I wrong in understanding the policy in China has evolved because they had "too many abortions performed"?

 

[BilliardsBall]

Billiard's apparent disbelief in climate change as reality?

You accuse me of making emotional arguments and then smear me? I'm unsure I've ever debated climate change from either side anywhere at ReligiousForums.com. It really adds to "my side's" strengths against abortion when you make so many personal slurs and attacks--without merit. I'm not wanting to attack you nor do I feel an urge to retaliate but after telling me not to make emotional arguments, to slur what I write seems dishonest.

 

[Marisa]

Sorry, was I wrong in understanding the policy in China has evolved because they had "too many abortions performed"?

Damn, you caught me. Yes, you were wrong in interpreting China's policy on abortion. Originally, it was to promote the "one child" policy adopted by that country. Do try looking at China as a culture, though, and not as an extension of your anti-choice argument. They are not western. They are a society that prizes a male child over female children. Imagine that, a culture in which women and girls are thought of as "less than" males. Whoulda thunk it? And as a result of that, and hand in hand with a one child per family policy, abuses exist. But this does not make you "right". You're still wrong, and what's more is that you consciously, with malice of forethought, twisted the realities of Chinese policy to further your own agenda.

Understand this: in no way does a policy that promotes childbirth constitute a threat to childbirth. Okay? Stop using China as an argument, you're not making yourself look rational.

 

[Marisa]

You accuse me of making emotional arguments and then smear me? I'm unsure I've ever debated climate change from either side anywhere at ReligiousForums.com. It really adds to "my side's" strengths against abortion when you make so many personal slurs and attacks--without merit. I'm not wanting to attack you nor do I feel an urge to retaliate but after telling me not to make emotional arguments, to slur what I write seems dishonest.

I didn't smear you. Get over yourself.

Look at what I said which was that climate change presents a demonstrable threat to our species, and you replied with a histrionic and completely irrational fear of abortion quotas as our species greatest challenge. At the moment, you seem to be using an "i'm rubber you're glue" argument against me. Such an argument belongs on an elementary school playground.

 

[columbus]

Sorry, was I wrong in understanding the policy in China has evolved because they had "too many abortions performed"?

Yes, you were wrong.
The problem in China (India has it too) was sex selection. People aborted healthy girls because boys were more valued.
The original thought was quite reasonable. The population is growing unsustainably. The problem is that the culture still values males and so if a couple could only have one child they wanted a boy. With sonograms you can choose.
So nearly a generation was sex selected. The result was a preponderance of boys. The normal distribution is female 50.1% and male 49.9%. Male 52% and female 48% causes huge social issues.

The Chinese government may have paved the way for acceptance of gay men and women's rights in their culture.
I don't know. Maybe. They have laid the groundwork.
Tom

 

[BilliardsBall]

Damn, you caught me. Yes, you were wrong in interpreting China's policy on abortion. Originally, it was to promote the "one child" policy adopted by that country. Do try looking at China as a culture, though, and not as an extension of your anti-choice argument. They are not western. They are a society that prizes a male child over female children. Imagine that, a culture in which women and girls are thought of as "less than" males. Whoulda thunk it? And as a result of that, and hand in hand with a one child per family policy, abuses exist. But this does not make you "right". You're still wrong, and what's more is that you consciously, with malice of forethought, twisted the realities of Chinese policy to further your own agenda.

Understand this: in no way does a policy that promotes childbirth constitute a threat to childbirth. Okay? Stop using China as an argument, you're not making yourself look rational.

Um, what? You are not making sense here. Sorry if I misunderstand you.

China was killing too many children, and did an about face on a policy.

 

[BilliardsBall]

I didn't smear you. Get over yourself.

Look at what I said which was that climate change presents a demonstrable threat to our species, and you replied with a histrionic and completely irrational fear of abortion quotas as our species greatest challenge. At the moment, you seem to be using an "i'm rubber you're glue" argument against me. Such an argument belongs on an elementary school playground.

Biblically speaking, God will judge the world for the pollution and abuse of it, which is causing (in part, I think) climate change.

Biblically speaking, God will judge those who take innocent life.

I think both are great challenges.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Yes, you were wrong.
The problem in China (India has it too) was sex selection. People aborted healthy girls because boys were more valued.
The original thought was quite reasonable. The population is growing unsustainably. The problem is that the culture still values males and so if a couple could only have one child they wanted a boy. With sonograms you can choose.
So nearly a generation was sex selected. The result was a preponderance of boys. The normal distribution is female 50.1% and male 49.9%. Male 52% and female 48% causes huge social issues.

The Chinese government may have paved the way for acceptance of gay men and women's rights in their culture.
I don't know. Maybe. They have laid the groundwork.
Tom

A lack of females would instigate some other changes. Here, it would affect us outrageously, at least until SCOTUS defined marriage as a guy and a gal, two of same or multiple guys with a gal. Scary! Or China could have a few wars and kill off some men. Think about it!