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 01-30-2017, 05:52 PM
 
Location: Ohio
15,678 posts, read 14,151,481 times
Reputation: 21847

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Threestep View Post
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 01-31-2017, 08:11 AM
 
Location: OKIE-Ville
5,451 posts, read 7,975,450 times
Reputation: 3109
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie View Post
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.
Ah, Townie. There is so much imprecision in your post I do not know where to start. Darwin Award post of the day, no?

Again, one does not have to insert religion into this dialogue just as you have done in some of your posts.

This need not be a religious issue. It is a simple common sense issue regarding humanity. You can make it theological if you want to, but I do not have to. I can look to the empirical data we have access to now---i.e., the clarity of ultrasounds within the womb.

There are many ProLife atheists, agnostics, etc. that have an aversion for anything theological yet still can look at the scientific data honestly and make the obvious observation that within the womb of a pregnant womb is a human child. Go ahead and advance outmoded stereotypes like your caricature of me utilizing a Bible verse to defend my position (which I have not done), but you do nothing to add to the dialogue when you do so.

Cheers.

secularprolife

About Pro-Life Humanists - Pro-Life Humanists
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2017, 11:27 AM
 
Location: OKIE-Ville
5,451 posts, read 7,975,450 times
Reputation: 3109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bass&Catfish2008 View Post
Ah, Townie. There is so much imprecision in your post I do not know where to start. Darwin Award post of the day, no?

Again, one does not have to insert religion into this dialogue just as you have done in some of your posts.

This need not be a religious issue. It is a simple common sense issue regarding humanity. You can make it theological if you want to, but I do not have to. I can look to the empirical data we have access to now---i.e., the clarity of ultrasounds within the womb.

There are many ProLife atheists, agnostics, etc. that have an aversion for anything theological yet still can look at the scientific data honestly and make the obvious observation that within the womb of a pregnant womb is a human child. Go ahead and advance outmoded stereotypes like your caricature of me utilizing a Bible verse to defend my position (which I have not done), but you do nothing to add to the dialogue when you do so.

Cheers.

secularprolife

About Pro-Life Humanists - Pro-Life Humanists
*woman
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2017, 05:50 PM
 
Location: OKIE-Ville
5,451 posts, read 7,975,450 times
Reputation: 3109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53 View Post
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.
OhioLady, congratulations for using enumeration. Your argument is intimated in a much more concise way when you do what you're told. Well done!

Let's try dealing with the facts again, shall we?

1. Margaret Sanger was the founder of the Eugenics Movement and had no problem associating with the Klu Klux Klan. No, but by all means, she wasn't racist. She desired to remove the so-called "unfit" of society. Classic elitism which often leads to racism. Ever heard of the "Negro Project"? = the epitome of racism.

2. I've never once said that Planned Parenthood abducted individuals to use its "services." So again, go on and interject and assume. Generally when one does such things it's evidence he/she is losing the argument. Keep trying though, I like your gumption!


3. The burden of proof is on you OhioLady. Explain away the developing child all you want from the scientific and empirical data we have from fetal ultrasounds, but again, it comes down to the taking of an innocent life, generally as a result of inconvenience.


4. Ah, the classic non-sequitur. Pro-Abortionistic females like to shout from the mountaintops about "their body" which is fine. The problem with that argument is that it is self defeating since there is another body within the body of the woman which necessitates protection as well.


5. That's your opinion which is totally unsubstantiated. Not a good argument. Good try though.

Keep at it OhioLady. We're making progress.


Cheers and Good Day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-03-2017, 05:17 AM
 
Location: OK
2,764 posts, read 6,651,199 times
Reputation: 1936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Threestep View Post
That is so 70s
Thanks
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-04-2017, 08:31 PM
 
Location: Ohio
15,678 posts, read 14,151,481 times
Reputation: 21847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bass&Catfish2008 View Post
OhioLady, congratulations for using enumeration. Your argument is intimated in a much more concise way when you do what you're told. Well done!

Let's try dealing with the facts again, shall we?

1. Margaret Sanger was the founder of the Eugenics Movement and had no problem associating with the Klu Klux Klan. No, but by all means, she wasn't racist. She desired to remove the so-called "unfit" of society. Classic elitism which often leads to racism. Ever heard of the "Negro Project"? = the epitome of racism.

2. I've never once said that Planned Parenthood abducted individuals to use its "services." So again, go on and interject and assume. Generally when one does such things it's evidence he/she is losing the argument. Keep trying though, I like your gumption!


3. The burden of proof is on you OhioLady. Explain away the developing child all you want from the scientific and empirical data we have from fetal ultrasounds, but again, it comes down to the taking of an innocent life, generally as a result of inconvenience.


4. Ah, the classic non-sequitur. Pro-Abortionistic females like to shout from the mountaintops about "their body" which is fine. The problem with that argument is that it is self defeating since there is another body within the body of the woman which necessitates protection as well.


5. That's your opinion which is totally unsubstantiated. Not a good argument. Good try though.

Keep at it OhioLady. We're making progress.


Cheers and Good Day.

1. The truth about Margaret Sanger. Get educated instead of relying on sound bites.


The Truth About Margaret Sanger and Eugenics


2. Explain why you feel the mere presence of a Planned Parenthood is some kind of threat to minorities.

3. Sorry, the burden of proof is on you to prove the life of a fetus trumps the life of a fully grown woman. Your emotions do not prove anything.


4. Like it or not, my body, my choice. MY BODY....I can smoke, drink, toke, eat mercury laden tuna sandwiches for lunch everyday, live on chips and cookies, drink a pot of coffee everyday, you can't force me to go for prenatal care or force me to take prenatal vitamins.....in short....you cannot force me to take care of a fetus or stop me from getting rid of it......too bad for you.


5. See #4. You cannot force me to have a baby for someone else.....I am not a slave to a fetus or "want to be" parents. A fetus feeding off of my body will not survive unless I want it to....MY body, MY choice.


Cheers and Good Day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2017, 01:46 PM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
18,033 posts, read 14,346,167 times
Reputation: 5452
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bass&Catfish2008 View Post
Ah, Townie. There is so much imprecision in your post I do not know where to start. Darwin Award post of the day, no?

Again, one does not have to insert religion into this dialogue just as you have done in some of your posts.

This need not be a religious issue. It is a simple common sense issue regarding humanity. You can make it theological if you want to, but I do not have to. I can look to the empirical data we have access to now---i.e., the clarity of ultrasounds within the womb.

There are many ProLife atheists, agnostics, etc. that have an aversion for anything theological yet still can look at the scientific data honestly and make the obvious observation that within the womb of a pregnant womb is a human child. Go ahead and advance outmoded stereotypes like your caricature of me utilizing a Bible verse to defend my position (which I have not done), but you do nothing to add to the dialogue when you do so.

Cheers.

secularprolife

About Pro-Life Humanists - Pro-Life Humanists
But much of the activism to ban abortion comes from conservative Christians, especially in Oklahoma.

Anyway, if government really wants to do something about abortion, then it should try to nip the problem before it's in the bud by requiring high schools to teach sex education and the various methods of birth control. Teaching abstinence only is not enough. Who knows how many married couples, who weren't ready for a child, have gotten abortions, because they didn't learn about birth control in high school? Access to birth control shouldn't be a problem for any woman. Instead, Republicans pass laws, such as requiring a pregnant woman to look at a ultra-sound and wait 3 days before getting an abortion. The big problem with that is after that is done the woman can still choose abortion. So why not concentrate on nipping the problem before it's even in the bud?

Once again, why didn't the highly Christian conservative state of Mississippi vote in favor of granting personhood, or in other words, all human rights to the fetus starting from the moment of conception? After all, you said that within the womb of a woman is a human child.

Finally, it's none of my business what a woman does after being confronted by her unwanted pregnancy. What is my personal concern is to make sure it remains none of my business by making sure birth control is used before having intercourse with a woman. When it comes to abortion, it should be safe, legal and rare.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2017, 03:52 PM
 
Location: OKIE-Ville
5,451 posts, read 7,975,450 times
Reputation: 3109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53 View Post
1. The truth about Margaret Sanger. Get educated instead of relying on sound bites.





The Truth About Margaret Sanger and Eugenics





2. Explain why you feel the mere presence of a Planned Parenthood is some kind of threat to minorities.



3. Sorry, the burden of proof is on you to prove the life of a fetus trumps the life of a fully grown woman. Your emotions do not prove anything.





4. Like it or not, my body, my choice. MY BODY....I can smoke, drink, toke, eat mercury laden tuna sandwiches for lunch everyday, live on chips and cookies, drink a pot of coffee everyday, you can't force me to go for prenatal care or force me to take prenatal vitamins.....in short....you cannot force me to take care of a fetus or stop me from getting rid of it......too bad for you.





5. See #4. You cannot force me to have a baby for someone else.....I am not a slave to a fetus or "want to be" parents. A fetus feeding off of my body will not survive unless I want it to....MY body, MY choice.





Cheers and Good Day.
1. No soundbites here, OhioLady. That Sanger saw fit to speak with a Klu Klux Klan group says enough. Nah, she ain't racist at all. Spin it however you want, but her views on Eugenics definitely formed a pillar in the modern day infanticide movement perpetuated by Planned Parenthood.

2. You're reading into what I asserted again which gets you nowhere and does nothing to advance the dialogue. Truth of the Matter: A higher degree of Planned Parenthoods are in minority communities for a reason. Deflect and dodge all you want, but that's the truth.

3. No. The burden of proof is on you, unless you are truly blind and you cannot honestly speak of that to which you are asserting (which would be yet another absurdity on your part). The actuality of unborn baby photos within the womb are an incontestable component of this debate. Sorry you have nothing to stand on here but your interpretation of the photo. I, on the other hand, can look at the photo empirically and demonstrate that what I'm looking at is a human being.

4-5. Your argument sounds cogent, but it is lacking. There is another body in the scenario, a body within the womb of the mother, which should not be torn limb from limb like trash. Horrific and depraved procedure.

Try again, OhioLady.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2017, 03:58 PM
 
Location: OKIE-Ville
5,451 posts, read 7,975,450 times
Reputation: 3109
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie View Post
But much of the activism to ban abortion comes from conservative Christians, especially in Oklahoma.

Anyway, if government really wants to do something about abortion, then it should try to nip the problem before it's in the bud by requiring high schools to teach sex education and the various methods of birth control. Teaching abstinence only is not enough. Who knows how many married couples, who weren't ready for a child, have gotten abortions, because they didn't learn about birth control in high school? Access to birth control shouldn't be a problem for any woman. Instead, Republicans pass laws, such as requiring a pregnant woman to look at a ultra-sound and wait 3 days before getting an abortion. The big problem with that is after that is done the woman can still choose abortion. So why not concentrate on nipping the problem before it's even in the bud?

Once again, why didn't the highly Christian conservative state of Mississippi vote in favor of granting personhood, or in other words, all human rights to the fetus starting from the moment of conception? After all, you said that within the womb of a woman is a human child.

Finally, it's none of my business what a woman does after being confronted by her unwanted pregnancy. What is my personal concern is to make sure it remains none of my business by making sure birth control is used before having intercourse with a woman. When it comes to abortion, it should be safe, legal and rare.
I agree with your stance on sex education; it should be beefed up. However, it's clearly not enough. There will always be unwanted pregnancies.

As for what is and what is not your business, if abortion is murder, and we have more than simple rationale to show this is the case, why would we not seek to save lives?

As for bringing Christianity into the argument, it's not necessary. The Pro Life movement can stand on empiricism and science alone.

Good effort, but like OhioLady, your views to overcome basic contradictions in your argument regarding this matter have been weighed and found wanting.

Cheers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2017, 05:17 PM
 
Location: Ohio
15,678 posts, read 14,151,481 times
Reputation: 21847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bass&Catfish2008 View Post
1. No soundbites here, OhioLady. That Sanger saw fit to speak with a Klu Klux Klan group says enough. Nah, she ain't racist at all. Spin it however you want, but her views on Eugenics definitely formed a pillar in the modern day infanticide movement perpetuated by Planned Parenthood.

2. You're reading into what I asserted again which gets you nowhere and does nothing to advance the dialogue. Truth of the Matter: A higher degree of Planned Parenthoods are in minority communities for a reason. Deflect and dodge all you want, but that's the truth.

3. No. The burden of proof is on you, unless you are truly blind and you cannot honestly speak of that to which you are asserting (which would be yet another absurdity on your part). The actuality of unborn baby photos within the womb are an incontestable component of this debate. Sorry you have nothing to stand on here but your interpretation of the photo. I, on the other hand, can look at the photo empirically and demonstrate that what I'm looking at is a human being.

4-5. Your argument sounds cogent, but it is lacking. There is another body in the scenario, a body within the womb of the mother, which should not be torn limb from limb like trash. Horrific and depraved procedure.

Try again, OhioLady.

1. Women of ALL races get abortions, if one race aborts more than another that has more to do with circumstance than color. Want minorities to abort less?.....improve their living conditions....better education, better jobs, etc.


You are just using the eugenics excuse to deny all women the right to abort, not just minority women.


2.Planned Parenthoods are not needed in well to do neighborhoods where women have other choices, just as you will not find cash advance stores in well to do neighborhoods because the people in those neighborhoods have other choices.


Your view that minority women choose to abort just because there happens to be a Planned Parenthood in their neighborhood reeks of racism, as you are assuming minority women are so simple minded that they will choose to abort just because they happen across a PP. How insulting. In essence, you are saying white women are smarter than minority women.


3. What you see when you look at a fetus is subjective and proves nothing.


4.-5. That "other body" is not a person. It is nothing more than an organism. An organism that has no right to endanger the health and life of a woman against her will.


If you ever get your wish and legal abortions are banned here is what you will have accomplished.


White privileged women will have access to safe abortions, poor and minority women will get unsafe, backstreet abortions, just like in the "good ole days" before Roe v Wade.


Good for you.
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.

© 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