Report: 23 Pro-Life Organizations Vandalized, Firebombed by Pro-Abortion Activists in Recent Weeks

[KW]

On the abortion issue, one side supports justice and liberty, and the other side opposes it. They are not equivalent.

One side supports the violent slaughter of innocent babies.

That's your side.

 

[KW]

Sorry, but it is impossible to kill "unborn children". Children do not exist until after they are born. What are you going to do? Stuff them back in the uterus? The mother might have something to say about that.

Brain dead evasion.

If you don't kill the unborn child, you get a born child.

Killing unborn children is killing innocent human beings.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes there is:

"Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you."

"Whatever you do to the least of these you do to me."

Unborn children are known to God. We are told to protect the weak.

Sorry, but that is a poetic verse about a specific person. Worse yet it implies that he knew the bullfrog guy before he was even conceived. Exodus 21 22-23 disagrees with you.

 

[KW]

Splitting hairs. He gave himself up.
I'd define" nearly" as he was running at the door with gun ready to fire and was stopped by police.

Fine. That's a judgment call.

Either way, Democrats blocked the bill to give Supreme Court Justices more security.

Why?

 

[KW]

Sorry, but that is a poetic verse about a specific person. Worse yet it implies that he knew the bullfrog guy before he was even conceived. Exodus 21 22-23 disagrees with you.

So God knew one person before he formed them in the womb, but no one else?

 

[Subduction Zone]

One side supports the violent slaughter of innocent babies.

That's your side.

No, that would have to be your side. I can quote Bible verse about that too. Pro-choice people tend to be against killing living people.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So God knew one person before he formed them in the womb, but no one else?

No, not necessarily. It was a poetic verse. That means that one need not interpret it literally. An overly literal approach to the Bible is a huge mistake since it ends up in refuting the Bible.

 

[KW]

No, that would have to be your side. I can quote Bible verse about that too. Pro-choice people tend to be against killing living people.

That's obviously false.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's obviously false.

That looks like a late stage abortion . They are very rare and still would occur in numbers almost the same as now even if Roe v Wade is overturned.

Do you know why?

You should be able to do better than that. You are now refuting yourself.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

That's obviously false.

RIP to them. Very sad.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's obviously false.

Almost certainly from a medically necessary abortion.

As I said, even if Roe v Wade is overturned those will still exist. Meanwhile this is what you believe, if you take all of the Bible as "true":


Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’”

We are not the ones advocating killing.

By the way, even according to the Bible that is not murder.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

One side supports the violent slaughter of innocent babies.

That's your side.

No, that's your side.

You claim that fetuses are "innocent babies" but are happy to do nothing about their "violent slaughter" unless you can hurt a pregnant woman in the process.

 

[Subduction Zone]

RIP to them. Very sad.

Late term abortions are almost never done to end a pregnancy because it is inconvenient. They are almost always done because of severe threats of health to the mother or the fetus being dead already. They are very expensive and voluntary ones are not covered by insurance and almost no doctor will do such an abortion. There are doctors that will do medically necessary ones.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Late term abortions are almost never done to end a pregnancy because it is inconvenient. They are almost always done because of severe threats of health to the mother or the fetus being dead already. They are very expensive and voluntary ones are not covered by insurance and almost no doctor will do such an abortion. There are doctors that will do medically necessary ones.

I know that. It's still sad.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I know that. It's still sad.

That is true. That was probably a pregnancy where the woman wanted to become a mother. I find it a bit disgusting when an abortion that probably almost certainly had to be done is used for propaganda. It shows that the people doing so have no morals at all.

 

[KW]

That is true. That was probably a pregnancy where the woman wanted to become a mother. I find it a bit disgusting when an abortion that probably almost certainly had to be done is used for propaganda. It shows that the people doing so have no morals at all.

Abortion is murder. Those who support murder have abandoned all claims to morality.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Abortion is murder. Those who support murder have abandoned all claims to morality.

What makes you think that? The Bible disagrees with you.

 

[Brian2]

A challenge for you if you think I'm being uncharitable:

Name one measure that a mainstream anti-choice group has proposed, in the name of reducing abortions, that makes things better for pregnant people. Just one that's a good enough option that it freely convinces pregnant people not to seek an abortion. Just one that doesn't involve cruelty or limiting the legal options available to pregnant people.

Just one.

You may be correct about that, I'm not sure. I do know there are options available, outside of abortion, if a pregnant woman does not want to keep the child.
I guess attacking the motives of those against abortion does not show us that abortion is something that is OK to do. All it does is show how you feel about those people,,,,,,,,,,, which may not be related to the ethics of abortion at all.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You may be correct about that, I'm not sure. I do know there are options available, outside of abortion, if a pregnant woman does not want to keep the child.

And which of these options have you tried to make more appealing so that pregnant people will freely choose them instead of abortion?

Please be specific.

I guess attacking the motives of those against abortion does not show us that abortion is something that is OK to do. All it does is show how you feel about those people,,,,,,,,,,, which may not be related to the ethics of abortion at all.

That's right.

Jumping in mid-thread like this, you may have missed some of the context for my post.

The anti-choice movement's conduct shows us that they don't care about actually preventing abortions.

The fact that the anti-choice movement is, by and large, based on misogyny and hypocrisy isn't why abortion rights should be protected, but the anti-choice movement is by and large based on misogyny and hypocrisy.

 

[Altfish]

Fine. That's a judgment call.

Either way, Democrats blocked the bill to give Supreme Court Justices more security.

Why?

I don't know, maybe they have enough anyway and they want to concentrate on giving schoolkids more security.
When the GOP starts taking gun control seriously, you will be able to criticise the Dems for their inaction, until then it is hypocrisy to do so.