U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Oklahoma
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-17-2017, 11:24 PM
 
Location: OKIE-Ville
5,452 posts, read 7,985,909 times
Reputation: 3109

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53 View Post
We get it, by removing PP from poor minority neighborhoods be can improve the health of poor minority women. It is always better to make it harder for poor minority women to obtain birth control, cancer screenings and abortion services. That way, we can be assured they will never get out of poverty or out of their neighborhoods and into ours.


It is always best that poor minority women have more children than they can care for, we need to keep them on public assistance and out of our neighborhoods and their children out of our schools.


The worst thing we can do is to offer poor minority women the tools they need to plan the size of their families, we must not allow them to break the cycle of poverty, we need to keep them in their place.


Only white women of means deserve easy access to family planning, that way, we can be assured their children can live in the best neighborhoods and go to the best schools, we must preserve the status quo.


And yes, we need to make sure only wealthy white women have access to safe abortions, you know, the way it was in the "good old days" before Roe v Wade. Poor women, and especially poor minority women, are just not worthy of modern medical care if they choose to abort.


Yes, we hear what you are saying........
Nah OhioLady, you don't.

Again, because you have not (or cannot?) deal with assertions that I've put forth, you just make assumptions. You have conjured up a good many things I have not said and applied them to me. Classic straw man.

Again (I've already intimated this several times), I firmly believe that abortion/infanticide is wrong for everyone, regardless of ethnicity, socioeconomics, age, background, et. al.

And, I stand by my earlier assertion that Planned Parenthood is a racist and death-dealing organization most dangerous to our African American and Latino brethren. History and statistics seems to confirm as much.

Chow.

Last edited by Bass&Catfish2008; 01-17-2017 at 11:40 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-18-2017, 12:00 AM
 
Location: Ohio
15,710 posts, read 14,182,900 times
Reputation: 21919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bass&Catfish2008 View Post
Nah Lady, you don't.

Again, because you have not (or cannot?) deal with assertions that I've put forth, you just make assumptions. You have conjured up a good many things I have not said and applied them to me. Classic straw man.

Again (I've already intimated this several times), I firmly believe that abortion/infanticide is wrong for everyone, regardless of ethnicity, socioeconomics, age, background, et. al.

And, I stand by my earlier assertion that Planned Parenthood is a racist and death-dealing organization most dangerous to our African American and Latino brethren. History and statistics seems to confirm as much.

Chow.

This, and your other assertions, are all based on emotion and devoid of facts.


You assume minority women abort just because a PP is in their neighborhood, perhaps because you don't want to deal with the real reasons they choose to abort.....their circumstances.


After all, it is much easier to ban abortion than to deal with the main reasons women choose to abort, lack of money and support, especially from baby daddies......that isn't so easy to legislate, is it?


You would rather pronounce your edict and feel smug that you have solved a problem, when, in fact, you are just kicking the can down the road.


One saving grace, the increase in women and children who need social services to survive will take money out of your pocket.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2017, 03:14 PM
 
Location: OKIE-Ville
5,452 posts, read 7,985,909 times
Reputation: 3109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53 View Post
This, and your other assertions, are all based on emotion and devoid of facts.


You assume minority women abort just because a PP is in their neighborhood, perhaps because you don't want to deal with the real reasons they choose to abort.....their circumstances.


After all, it is much easier to ban abortion than to deal with the main reasons women choose to abort, lack of money and support, especially from baby daddies......that isn't so easy to legislate, is it?


You would rather pronounce your edict and feel smug that you have solved a problem, when, in fact, you are just kicking the can down the road.


One saving grace, the increase in women and children who need social services to survive will take money out of your pocket.
I would spend my life savings if it meant abortion as a result of inconvenience would cease. So, by all means, take money out of my pocket.

I must have hurt your feelings because now you're conflating emotions with facts and you're still engaging in the exacting science of assumption.

I know you're not a big fan of facts, but here are some reiterated for you that I've listed previously...

1. Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sanger. Sanger was a known proponent of the Eugenics Movement which is all about terminating the least "fit" among the human race. Sanger viewed those of African descent, in particular, as representative as some of the least fit for society.

2. In the likeness of its founder's wish, Planned Parenthood destroys African American and Latino babies at a higher percentage per capita in comparison with other ethnicities.

3. Advances in medical technology have given us a much clearer picture within the womb. The conclusions asserting that a fetus is a "mass of tissue" are nonsensical as well as other justificatory terms such as your word "tadpole" (classy!) are based on outmoded science.

4. The vast majority of pregnancies pose little physical threat to the life of the mother. Hence, the vast majority of abortions are performed so as not to inconvenience the mother and/or father of the baby.

5. There are countless couples, both straight/gay, who would adopt in a heartbeat. Mothers opting to give their babies up for adoption rather than aborting provide aforementioned couples an easier avenue to adopt and experience the joy of having children.

So, there you go. Facts. My suggestion: deal with each one in your response. Start with "1" and precede through thesis "5."

You can do it, OhioLady! I have faith in you.

Cheers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2017, 03:41 PM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
18,125 posts, read 14,402,235 times
Reputation: 5508
Margaret Sanger views on Eugenics included the entire human race. Martin Luther King never spoke ill of her. A number of lies told about her have been proven false:

Did Margaret Sanger believe African-Americans "should be eliminated"? | PolitiFact New Hampshire

Meanwhile, the rate of abortion has been slowing falling under President Obama. If some people aren't happy with that, then I'm sorry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2017, 06:03 PM
 
Location: 78745
3,350 posts, read 2,476,843 times
Reputation: 5818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweekansas View Post
I wonder will condom machines as pregnancy prevention be required in all public restrooms as well. In all fairness, they should be, if the state is going to require anti-abortion messages in all public restrooms.

I'm not in favor of abortion if the baby can live outside it's momma's womb. But I have yet to meet an anti-abortion fanatic who would be willing to adopt a baby in order to save it from being aborted.

It's a personal choice and nobody else's business besides the momma, her doctor and her baby's daddy. That's how I see it. It's a common sense approach.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2017, 05:46 AM
 
Location: OKIE-Ville
5,452 posts, read 7,985,909 times
Reputation: 3109
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie View Post
Margaret Sanger views on Eugenics included the entire human race. Martin Luther King never spoke ill of her. A number of lies told about her have been proven false:

Did Margaret Sanger believe African-Americans "should be eliminated"? | PolitiFact New Hampshire

Meanwhile, the rate of abortion has been slowing falling under President Obama. If some people aren't happy with that, then I'm sorry.
You mean there are those who wish to discredit the detractors of Sanger's legacy? *sarcasm* You're stating the obvious, Townie.

I can play the cut and paste game too if you want to go that route. There are numerous sites which present the other view, which I'm sure you well know. There are many African American leaders including MLK's descendants who disavow abortion and Planned Parenthood, in particular. The support within the African American grows daily.

Sanger was an ardent Eugenics Movement proponent and her company executes minority children at a higher percentage per capita in comparison to other non-minority ethnicities. Her death-dealing lives on long after her own death.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2017, 12:00 PM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
18,125 posts, read 14,402,235 times
Reputation: 5508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bass&Catfish2008 View Post
You mean there are those who wish to discredit the detractors of Sanger's legacy? *sarcasm* You're stating the obvious, Townie.

I can play the cut and paste game too if you want to go that route. There are numerous sites which present the other view, which I'm sure you well know. There are many African American leaders including MLK's descendants who disavow abortion and Planned Parenthood, in particular. The support within the African American grows daily.

Sanger was an ardent Eugenics Movement proponent and her company executes minority children at a higher percentage per capita in comparison to other non-minority ethnicities. Her death-dealing lives on long after her own death.
I am still pro-choice and very sad for you how morally wrong you are for wanting abortion banned. You are so sadly wrong, because you can't name one country where abortion is banned, yet the rate of abortion there is lower than here and religious freedom is respected. Neither can you name one bible verse which specifically bans abortion. So please see the error of your ways, change your mind and become pro-choice.

It would be mighty presumptuous of me to think I have the right to tell a pregnant woman to not get an abortion and would only expect to hear back, "Go to Hell" or "Drop dead", if I tried to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2017, 03:33 PM
 
Location: Ohio
15,710 posts, read 14,182,900 times
Reputation: 21919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bass&Catfish2008 View Post
I would spend my life savings if it meant abortion as a result of inconvenience would cease. So, by all means, take money out of my pocket.

I must have hurt your feelings because now you're conflating emotions with facts and you're still engaging in the exacting science of assumption.

I know you're not a big fan of facts, but here are some reiterated for you that I've listed previously...

1. Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sanger. Sanger was a known proponent of the Eugenics Movement which is all about terminating the least "fit" among the human race. Sanger viewed those of African descent, in particular, as representative as some of the least fit for society.

2. In the likeness of its founder's wish, Planned Parenthood destroys African American and Latino babies at a higher percentage per capita in comparison with other ethnicities.

3. Advances in medical technology have given us a much clearer picture within the womb. The conclusions asserting that a fetus is a "mass of tissue" are nonsensical as well as other justificatory terms such as your word "tadpole" (classy!) are based on outmoded science.

4. The vast majority of pregnancies pose little physical threat to the life of the mother. Hence, the vast majority of abortions are performed so as not to inconvenience the mother and/or father of the baby.

5. There are countless couples, both straight/gay, who would adopt in a heartbeat. Mothers opting to give their babies up for adoption rather than aborting provide aforementioned couples an easier avenue to adopt and experience the joy of having children.

So, there you go. Facts. My suggestion: deal with each one in your response. Start with "1" and precede through thesis "5."

You can do it, OhioLady! I have faith in you.

Cheers.

1. PP has nothing to do with eugenics, in fact, neither did Margaret Sanger, her thoughts on the subject have been twisted ad nauseam. For some reason, you do not think minority women are capable of choosing to abort because they WANT TO, that they are simple minded and gullible, so much so, that they will choose to abort a wanted pregnancy just because they happen across PP. You know what that is? It's racist.


2. Has Planned Parenthood abducted minority women and forced them to abort? Have any proof of that? Links please.


3. Pictures of a fetus in the womb do not change the fact that it is not viable, is not sentient, does not have rights that trump those of a woman, a fully formed, sentient being.


4. If death due to pregnancy could be predicted in advance, why would ANY women die at all? And then there is this: Why a woman chooses to abort is her business and hers alone.


5. Oh, so you condone forced births to provide product for the adoption industry.....reeks of slavery, doesn't it? What are your plans for all of the unwanted children once adoption has reached its saturation point?....and it will, quicker than you think.


You hurt my feelings? Too funny. It is, however, very disturbing that you and so many like you, either knowingly promote falsehoods or are unable to discern fact from fiction due to your emotions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2017, 06:10 AM
 
14,715 posts, read 453,817 times
Reputation: 23142
Annie - there is only one opinion and that is the right one, isn't it? Did you march, damage property, block streets or did you watch it on TV?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2017, 08:22 PM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
18,125 posts, read 14,402,235 times
Reputation: 5508
But according to Kellyanne Conway, there are alternative facts.
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:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Oklahoma
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:38 PM.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top