U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 05-06-2009, 03:42 PM
 
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
657 posts, read 990,297 times
Reputation: 390

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by basketballakev View Post
Not true. Breastfeeding is OPTIMAL for the development of the baby.

ProMoM, Inc. - Why is breastfeeding important?



Look what I said above. Do you not know how to provide basic natural human care for a baby?



What's wrong with a little rhetoric fun?
Optimal/Ideal and Basic are two vastly differing levels of care when it comes to babies. Breastfeeding is optimal, as correctly stated above by you. However, Optimal is not the bare minimum to sustain life; that's where Basic comes in, and thus, formula (ie. NOT breast milk, possibly fed by a non-mother person).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-06-2009, 03:43 PM
 
Location: Pensacola, Fl
656 posts, read 632,882 times
Reputation: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeeee22895 View Post
This bit of rambling makes no sense. How would a pregnant woman not have the same constitutional rights as her baby?


For one, she is forced to become a host for a fetus. If that doesn't say anything, then there is no help for you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeeee22895 View Post
Fewer than 500 women a year die in childbirth. The vast majority of them are overweight and die of strokes or aneurysms. The canard that "we must choose between the woman's life and the child's" is so rare as to be virtually nonexistent.


And what about the women who have complications arising from pregnancy? The women who were fortunate enough to make it out of childbirth but die later because of the child bearing process? Do we disregard the MILLIONS of women who go through that each year to fit your statistic and make you feel at ease?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeeee22895 View Post
Miscarriages would only be a problem if the doctor detects foul play.


If you cannot see the logic fallacy in this statement then sadly, there is no help for you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeeee22895 View Post
It's only futile because pro-abortioners aren't interested in truth or logic. It's convenience for the ladies and votes for the politicians. Believe me, if fetuses could vote, all those Democrat politicians would be leading the pro-life marches.


It seems to me that you have a very narrow understanding of life as a whole. Do you know that the most women who get abortions are middle aged with kids already? Are they dirty sluts and whores who have sex with every guy (who in actuality, is their husband) they see and using abortion as a means for birth control? Dude, please, give us ALL a break.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeeee22895 View Post
Yes. You've admitted it's human life, and you plain flat out don't care.


And you flat out don't care about human life also. Because if you did, you'd spend more time worrying about the millions of children dying in Africa from dysentery, TB, hunger, and HIV. You'd be more concerned with our soldiers who are used as cannon fodder to fight meaningless wars over land, oil, and money. You'd care more about the humans that are already living outside of the womb than a embryo that can die at any given moment for no reason at all. Don't try to lecture us on how much we don't care about human life while you blatantly ignore the viable human life that dies every single day.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeeee22895 View Post
Sorry, I would (and have) intervened in rape situations against the rapist's wishes. I would intervene in an armed robbery against the robber's wishes. And I am working to stop abortion against the baby-killer's wishes. So yes, I DO have the right to decide in all these instances.


That's fine and dandy that you would do all these things, but, you do not have autonomy over someone else's body. You DO NOT have the right to force someone else to do something based on your personal conviction or belief. You DO NOT have the right to force someone to keep an embryo or fetus they do not want, REGARDLESS of their personal reasons.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeeee22895 View Post
The only possible justification for taking a life is in the course of self-defense, as in a necessary war, such as Iraq was.


Don't even get me started on the atrocity that was the Iraq War (which was started over money no doubt).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeeee22895 View Post
I have never heard of a case where a fetus was attacking a woman, and the woman needed to defend herself.


So what say you about eggs that implant in the wall of a flalopian tube? They aren't attacking the woman and ruining her health? Give me a break dude.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeeee22895 View Post
The usual reason a woman aborts is so she can continue on living her self-centered do-as-you-please lifestyle.


Yes, because all us women are slutty b*tches and hoes, having sex with any and everything that even has the appearance of a penis. Right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeeee22895 View Post
This is where you screw up, logically. The woman is secondary in this whole process because the consequences to her are minor compared to the consequences to the baby.


No, the woman is first because she has autonomy over her body. She has the right to decide whether she wants to keep a fetus or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeeee22895 View Post
Are you kidding? Pro-lifers have won big victories in the Supreme Court in recent years.


Is abortion still legal?

Pro-lifer's haven't done anything worthwhile or meaningful except blow up abortion clinics and shoot doctors while getting more people to turn against their cause. If that's a victory for you then have at it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 04:58 PM
 
Location: Under a bridge.
3,196 posts, read 3,383,570 times
Reputation: 959
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeeee22895
I would intervene in an armed robbery against the robber's wishes. And I am working to stop abortion against the baby-killer's wishes.

Have you ever put yourself in harms way to stop a crime? (oh wait. I'm sorry I asked you a question--as one who is highly regarded you CAN'T answer questions.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 06:56 PM
 
1,330 posts, read 270,552 times
Reputation: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcashley View Post
[/i]
Have you ever put yourself in harms way to stop a crime? (oh wait. I'm sorry I asked you a question--as one who is highly regarded you CAN'T answer questions.)
I most certainly have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 07:02 PM
 
71 posts, read 77,538 times
Reputation: 90
Hmm. Are you talking about the 'poorly written' leftwing attempts to overturn the Partial Birth Abortion Ban who were promptly shut down by the USSC?. Yeah, I remember them.

First of all, do you even know what 'partial birth abortion' is. Of course not you don't because it does not really exist in the real world outside of your imagination. The American Medical Association does not recognize the term 'partial birth abortion' because there is no such thing. The closest medical procedure that 'partial birth abortion' might be referring to is intact dilation and extraction. This is only used in late-term abortions, which for your information make up less than a percent of all abortions. These abortions are done because the woman's HEALTH is in danger and/or the fetus as a severe abnormality that was discovered late in the pregnancy. The most common reason this procedure is used is to remove the fetus intact from the mother's body, so that the mother can have a body to hold in her arms. This allows the family to treat the fetus as if it were a person.

Therefore, passing this bill was just Bush and his buddies' pathetic attempt to excite their uninformed base. It is a very weak bill that only works to further dehumanize the fetus for families that want to see their fetus. It does nothing to stop abortions. It just gets the GOP’s base all riled up for no good reason.

Also, the Supreme Court did not promptly shut down the bill. As soon as it was passed 3 separate lawsuits were filed and 3 District Courts found it unconstitutional. It took years to make it too the Supreme Court where the court declared it constitutional by a very weak 5-4 margin. And the only reason the bill was allowed is because the procedure does not benefit the health of the mother and may pose a risk to the health of the mother. This shows how pathetic this pro-life legal battle is because instead of attacking abortion head on, the best they can do is distort and sensationalize a rarely used procedure that actually helps families cope with the loss of a fetus. And even for this marginal 'victory' they had to fight for years. Their reward is that now doctors will only use procedures that dismember the fetus in the womb, even if the mother wants to see it and treat it as if it were a person.

So congratulations GOP on your silly victory! You sure told all those evil woman who have 'partial birth abortions' at eight months for fun.

Let's see. during the Bush administration, the Senate was GOP for a total of five and a half years with an average margin of 51-49, notwithstanding liberals disguised as Republicans like Specter, Snowe, and Collins.. Do you really think you could pass abortion legislation with that tiny of a margin (or deficit)?

What about the 'partial birth abortion ban' nonsense they passed that came under immediate constitutional attack and was barely upheld by the Supreme Court? They managed to get their other neocon bills passed. And again, any silly legislation they pass will be subject to extreme scrutiny and found unconstitutional if they try to attack abortion head on.


Simple. It means embryos are living from the moment of conception. Why is this concept complicated for leftwingers?
This concept is irrelevant because fetuses will never get constitutional rights.


We do? I don't remember backing off. Bring the constitutional rights on!!
This makes you a crazy radical detached from reality.

This bit of rambling makes no sense. How would a pregnant woman not have the same constitutional rights as her baby? Fewer than 500 women a year die in childbirth. The vast majority of them are overweight and die of strokes or aneurysms. The canard that "we must choose between the woman's life and the child's" is so rare as to be virtually nonexistent.

Just because it goes far beyond your ability to comprehend does not mean it makes no sense. First, I did not say the pregnant woman would not have the same constitutional rights as her fetus, I said she would have less constitutional rights than everyone else. The fetus is inside of her body. Any attempts to give it the same protections as an already born child are going to deny the constitutional rights of the mother. In order for the government to protect a fetus from a woman who they believe is abusing it (ie. she is not showing up for her appointments, she's not eating/sleeping well, etc.) they would have to take custody of her and force her to do what they think is in the best interests of the fetus. This is a clear violation of her constitutional rights.

Also, the pregnant woman's life and health will no longer be the doctor's primary concern once doctors are forced to waste time thinking about ‘the best interest of a fetus’ as if it were a separate individual. The doctor will be able to force the pregnant woman to undergo a C-section against her will or take any other risks that may endanger the HEALTH of the pregnant woman. Thus, all pregnant women (not just those 'evil women' who want abortions) will no longer have control over their own body. Their bodies will be government property. This is why you are detached from reality and why it will never happen in the United States of America.


Miscarriages would only be a problem if the doctor detects foul play. This is no different than if a child goes to the ER with a head injury, and the parents are questioned separately. Happens ever hour of every day.

See above. And this a crazy radical idea because your admitting that you want to treat a woman who has had a miscarriage as a potential criminals.

We aren't? What makes you think that? We adopt more than our share of them.

Sure you do.

No we don't. We want to make ALL abortions illegal.

Maybe you speak for yourself but the mainstream pro-life movement does not want to make all abortions illegal because they know that this is the fastest way to turn the general public against them. You are never going to be able to deny a woman who was raped the ability to seek an abortion in the USA. Almost anyone can understand the injustice of forcing a woman who was raped to undergo a pregnancy and give birth. The fact that you don’t speaks volumes about you and your narrow understanding of the world.

The only time I'm wasting is the time I've spent responding to your incoherence.

Then don't. But I will keep responding to you.


Yah, that would be highly unfortunate. But I don't see what would make that child less a human than any other child.

It does make it less of a human being because it WILL be aborted in any civilized country no questions asked. This is the prime reason why your ‘irrefutable proof’ is irrelevant to the abortion debate. No matter how hard you try, you are not going to force a nine year old child to carry on a pregnancy and give birth. This demonstrates how detached from reality you really are and why your crazy ideas aren't going anywhere. Abortions have always been performed and will always be performed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 10:03 PM
 
443 posts, read 778,773 times
Reputation: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeeee22895 View Post
I've been asked to repeat this several times. Here it is. This simple definition should effectively end the abortion debate for all time. But it won't, because the pro-abortion side isn't interested in facts or logic.

Here it is. Short. Simple. Ironclad.

A human embryo from the moment of conception is exactly the same genetically as the adult human being it will become (barring premature death) except in stage of development. There is no other difference. Period.

This definition has ended many abortion arguments. Nobody has ever been able to dispute or find an exception that invalidates any part of it.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 10:07 PM
 
985 posts, read 1,742,818 times
Reputation: 714
LOL Let's all just stop bothering with Eeeee. It's obvious he's only here to listen to (err see) himself babble so he can delude himself into thinking he's "won" and boost his pitiful ego. Because this isn't about the children, this entire thread is about Eeeee.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 10:22 PM
 
1,330 posts, read 270,552 times
Reputation: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by freedom99 View Post
\

First of all, do you even know what 'partial birth abortion' is. Of course not you don't because it does not really exist in the real world outside of your imagination. The American Medical Association does not recognize the term 'partial birth abortion' because there is no such thing. The closest medical procedure that 'partial birth abortion' might be referring to is intact dilation and extraction. This is only used in late-term abortions, which for your information make up less than a percent of all abortions. These abortions are done because the woman's HEALTH is in danger and/or the fetus as a severe abnormality that was discovered late in the pregnancy. The most common reason this procedure is used is to remove the fetus intact from the mother's body, so that the mother can have a body to hold in her arms. This allows the family to treat the fetus as if it were a person.

Therefore, passing this bill was just Bush and his buddies' pathetic attempt to excite their uninformed base. It is a very weak bill that only works to further dehumanize the fetus for families that want to see their fetus. It does nothing to stop abortions. It just gets the GOPís base all riled up for no good reason.

Also, the Supreme Court did not promptly shut down the bill. As soon as it was passed 3 separate lawsuits were filed and 3 District Courts found it unconstitutional. It took years to make it too the Supreme Court where the court declared it constitutional by a very weak 5-4 margin. And the only reason the bill was allowed is because the procedure does not benefit the health of the mother and may pose a risk to the health of the mother. This shows how pathetic this pro-life legal battle is because instead of attacking abortion head on, the best they can do is distort and sensationalize a rarely used procedure that actually helps families cope with the loss of a fetus. And even for this marginal 'victory' they had to fight for years. Their reward is that now doctors will only use procedures that dismember the fetus in the womb, even if the mother wants to see it and treat it as if it were a person.

So congratulations GOP on your silly victory! You sure told all those evil woman who have 'partial birth abortions' at eight months for fun.



What about the 'partial birth abortion ban' nonsense they passed that came under immediate constitutional attack and was barely upheld by the Supreme Court? They managed to get their other neocon bills passed. And again, any silly legislation they pass will be subject to extreme scrutiny and found unconstitutional if they try to attack abortion head on.

LOL. It makes me laugh you leftwing kooks talk about "going back door" and getting laws only by court ruling, as opposed to getting legilsation passed. Crazy leftwing judges are the ONLY way the left gets its radical social agenda. I don't remember any legislation making abortion the law of the land, do you? Then there' s gay marriage where you people undermine the will of the people time after time. Not one state has approved a gay marriage referendum.


This concept is irrelevant because fetuses will never get constitutional rights.

Sorry. It's moving our way more than it's moving your way. The Obama fiasco is nothing more than a speed bump.


This makes you a crazy radical detached from reality.
It makes me right on the money



Just because it goes far beyond your ability to comprehend does not mean it makes no sense. First, I did not say the pregnant woman would not have the same constitutional rights as her fetus, I said she would have less constitutional rights than everyone else. The fetus is inside of her body. Any attempts to give it the same protections as an already born child are going to deny the constitutional rights of the mother. In order for the government to protect a fetus from a woman who they believe is abusing it (ie. she is not showing up for her appointments, she's not eating/sleeping well, etc.) they would have to take custody of her and force her to do what they think is in the best interests of the fetus. This is a clear violation of her constitutional rights.

Also, the pregnant woman's life and health will no longer be the doctor's primary concern once doctors are forced to waste time thinking about Ďthe best interest of a fetusí as if it were a separate individual. The doctor will be able to force the pregnant woman to undergo a C-section against her will or take any other risks that may endanger the HEALTH of the pregnant woman. Thus, all pregnant women (not just those 'evil women' who want abortions) will no longer have control over their own body. Their bodies will be government property. This is why you are detached from reality and why it will never happen in the United States of America.

Which constutional right is violated when a woman carries her baby? This is getting more ludicrous by the minute.


.

See above. And this a crazy radical idea because your admitting that you want to treat a woman who has had a miscarriage as a potential criminals.

Only if there's evidence she induced the miscarriage. Can you read responses?


Sure you do.

Damn right we do. Conservative do most of the heavy lifting when it comes to kids, while you leftists sit on your brains and call for little babies to be skewered. This is the very definition of hypocrite.


Maybe you speak for yourself but the mainstream pro-life movement does not want to make all abortions illegal because they know that this is the fastest way to turn the general public against them. You are never going to be able to deny a woman who was raped the ability to seek an abortion in the USA. Almost anyone can understand the injustice of forcing a woman who was raped to undergo a pregnancy and give birth. The fact that you donít speaks volumes about you and your narrow understanding of the world.

Tell us again how a child that is the product of rape is somehow less human than another child? That bit of illogic escapes me.

Then don't. But I will keep responding to you.

And you'll continue to get embarrassed.

t does make it less of a human being because it WILL be aborted in any civilized country no questions askedl
Stop and think for a moment how bass-ackwards that is. Civilized people wouldn't never exterminate their young. Only barbarians do that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 10:32 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
38,755 posts, read 39,237,664 times
Reputation: 28893
Eeeee, nobody has disputed your amazing scientific Eureka moment. We all agree that it is true, and that such a fundamental ground-breaking conclusion could not have been reached without your superhuman genius and tireless effort, for which mankind is eternally grateful. The Nobel Committee will be in touch with you soon.

It simply has no relevance at all to the ethical question of when and for what reason a human embryo no longer takes priority over any other consideration.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 10:46 PM
 
1,330 posts, read 270,552 times
Reputation: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Eeeee, nobody has disputed your amazing scientific Eureka moment. We all agree that it is true, and that such a fundamental ground-breaking conclusion could not have been reached without your superhuman genius and tireless effort, for which mankind is eternally grateful. The Nobel Committee will be in touch with you soon.

It simply has no relevance at all to the ethical question of when and for what reason a human embryo no longer takes priority over any other consideration.
Since you admit I have proven my case that human life begins at conception, what priority could ever be more important than it's moral right to live?

If I got the Nobel, I would immediately contribute the money to Catholic Relief Services or some other pro-life organization. I would do this because it would rankle the hell out of the atheist socialist folks who give this award. I would also send a flunky to Norway to pick it up, because I wouldn't want to waste time spending it in that socialist hell hole.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top