Your view on abortion. Atheist welcome.

[Storm]

go to crime.about.com, and look it up there.

It won't let me post the URL

According to this, it was in 2005.

Ah, sorry. The minimum post rule slipped my mind.

 

[Circle_One]

Oh because 9 months of inconvenience is harsher than killing?

Ok, before reading the rest of your ridiculous posts, I must comment on this one.

REALLY?

Let me just take a shot in the dark here and say, you've never had a child, have you?

9 months of inconvenience? Do you honestly think THAT is what it's all about? Could you possibly be anymore thick skulled? Yes, all women who have abortions do so because it's so ******* inconvenient to be pregnant!

Get a flipping clue, my darling.

 

[leahrachelle]

Ok, before reading the rest of your ridiculous posts, I must comment on this one.

REALLY?

Let me just take a shot in the dark here and say, you've never had a child, have you?

9 months of inconvenience? Do you honestly think THAT is what it's all about? Could you possibly be anymore thick skulled? Yes, all women who have abortions do so because it's so ******* inconvenient to be pregnant!

Get a flipping clue, my darling.

Not everyone has your situation.
And honestly, the 5 people that I know that have had abortions had it for this reason, so no, I am not being ReDiCuLoUs.

 

[Circle_One]

Maybe in Canada; not here


That's obviously an assumption because I definately do.. Whatever limitations come about I'll be happy with. Of course I'll be most happy if it was completely banned, but a little is always better than nothing.

Of course! Because life was so much better in the old days, when women had to use COAT HANGERS, RIGHT?! Or backstreet doctors who didn't know what they were doing, and didn't use sterilized tools and KILLED the majority of their patients.

Yeah, you believe in life, when it's convenient for YOU. You couldn't give a DAMN about the women who would have to follow these options when your lot bans abortions and end up dying in the process. Who gives a DAMN about them, RIGHT?

 

[Circle_One]

Not everyone has your situation.
And honestly, the 5 people that I know that have had abortions had it for this reason, so no, I am not being ReDiCuLoUs.

So 5 people make up a majority?

 

[leahrachelle]

So 5 people make up a majority?

I assume you know that wasn't the point..
The point was that everyone I know that has had an abortion falls into this category.

 

[Storm]

I rather doubt that. It might be your opinion of their motivations, but they're not likely to open up to someone who's going to call them murderers.

 

[leahrachelle]

I rather doubt that. It might be your opinion of their motivations, but they're not likely to open up to someone who's going to call them murderers.

So I'm lying again arn't I?
1.) I'm not close to them. I am close to people that they are close with
2.) They don't know that I think they're murderers

 

[Circle_One]

So I'm lying again arn't I?
1.) I'm not close to them. I am close to people that they are close with
2.) They don't know that I think they're murderers

So the only evidence you have of your statistics is heresay? Third party information does not usually make for sustainable fact.

 

[Storm]

I said it might be your honest opinion. You've lied before, though.

 

[leahrachelle]

So the only evidence you have of your statistics is heresay? Third party information does not usually make for sustainable fact.

Please tell me how you would like me to prove this - ??
If you do not wish to believe me about stuff that isn't provable then whatever, but its your loss.

 

[leahrachelle]

I said it might be your honest opinion. You've lied before, though.

No, you assumed that I lied.
And I'm not going to respond to that anymore because it's really starting to get offensive

 

[Storm]

Then why did I say otherwise?

 

[Circle_One]

Please tell me how you would like me to prove this - ??
If you do not wish to believe me about stuff that isn't provable then whatever, but its your loss.

You have nothing to prove.

You are calling "fact" to things you don't really know firsthand about. You're stating you know people who've had abortions for the sole reason of pregnancy being inconvenient as a fact, when, in actuality, it is nothing more than third part information, which is not fact, but heresay. You don't really know if those people ACTUALLY had abortions for those reasons. You simply choose to believe a third party because you think it lends cause to your beliefs, when it actually doesn't, and instead makes you seem more gullible for believing something you don't know firsthand, which, in turn, makes your arguments seem full of wholes and lends no creedance to it whatsoever.

 

[Magic Man]

You should see teenagers nowadays... :/ It's sick really...

Um...ok. I've seen teenagers these days. What's your point?

I don't respect the lives of people who take other people's lives away.

In other words, you only respect some people's lives. That is why I said that your claim that I don't respect life as much as you is false, since I respect all lives.

Besides you're mischaracterizing it here anyway. They're not "taking other people's lives away" because the unborn "baby" is not actually human yet.

 

[Magic Man]

Maybe it's just me, but if you said not to be rude, I wouldn't take it in a rude way, no.

Then, it's just you. It would be good for you to understand that there are some words and phrases that are just offensive to most people, including murderer, whore, and many others. It doesn't matter how you qualify them, most people will take offense to be called those words. I do find it very hard to believe you'd have no problem with someone calling you one of those things even if they said "not to be rude", though.

 

[Magic Man]

Umm exactly...?

The point was that no abortions would be legal if the unborn were considered just as human as you and me. Therefore, obviously under the law, they are not considered human beings equal to you and me.

You got to admit mball, that was worded rather poorly.

Was it? I really think that was the best and most concise way of saying it. Oh well, hopefully the above makes it clear enough.

1% of abortions happen after 20th week - that's for you mball

And? I didn't say they didn't happen. The fact that they are 1% of all abortions proves my point, actually. Also, you should do a little more research to find out why those were done. Maybe 3/4 of them were done because of health complications. Then, you'd be down to .25% of all abortions being 21 weeks or older and unnecessary.

1.) I'm not close to them. I am close to people that they are close with

That's not a good way to convince us it's true. Now we have to take someone else's assessment of the situation through you? That makes it even less believable.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Maybe in Canada; not here

Ah... so the current state of the law is that people aren't sure whether abortion is legal or not? What are all those pro-life protesters protesting for, then?

Why would this entire national issue be taking place if it stated in the law what a human is??

Because there's a segment of society that wants that legal definition changed.

You can tell because the pro-life camp is asking for the law to be changed, not just to start enforcing current laws.

See the thing is, the issue never really came up before this. Didn't abortions really start around the 60s and 70s?
Before, it was probably extremely rare. If it was a common thing, the issue would have been dealt with a long time ago.

I'm not talking just about abortion; I'm talking about all issues that deal with the question of "personhood".

I mentioned the 14th Amendment; did you look at it? It specifies that representatives will be apportioned to the states based on the "whole number of persons" in each state. This has been the requirement for more than a century; have fetuses ever been included in this count? Have they ever been treated as "persons" under the law in any way whatsoever?

 

[pray4me]

The point was that no abortions would be legal if the unborn were considered just as human as you and me. Therefore, obviously under the law, they are not considered human beings equal to you and me.

Just because the law doesn't consider them to be human doesn't mean they're not. If another country had a law that said Americans weren't human would that mean we aren't? Would that make them murdering us okay? No it would not, just because a law says it doesn't make it true. A baby is just as much human before he or she is born as they are after. They simply need their mother more. I think it is unthinkable that the one person they need to survive, the one person they rely on can legally decide to kill them.

 

[Storm]

But they weren't discussing what the law should be, they were discussing what the law is. I don't think it was intentional, but you're moving the goalposts.