Is the "pro-life" movement really about promoting abstinence? (house of representatives, accuse)
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.
So what you mean is that women don't die as much as they could be expected to ? Well, good for them, no?
Not very many? see the article above. And don't tell me it's NYT and not acceptable as numbers, I am trying very hard to debate with you in a language that isn't mine, ok? search for counter numbers, i'll be happy to know about those.
Quote:
Originally Posted by personne
A simple NO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
I support the widespread use of contraceptives and sex education as do most. A life ends in every abortion. Not the case if you do not wear a seat belt.
So what you mean is that women don't die as much as they could be expected to ? Well, good for them, no?
Not very many? see the article above. And don't tell me it's NYT and not acceptable as numbers, I am trying very hard to debate with you in a language that isn't mine, ok? search for counter numbers, i'll be happy to know about those.
Women do NOT die today because of treatment. This is still happening with abortion. You still need follow up. So, the question was how many women died pre-RVW. It wasn't many because of the development of medicine.
I've never ever heard anyone connecting pro-life/anti-abortion with taking someone off of life support.
The owner may be confused, but don't assume pro-lifers think taking someone off of life support is murder.
Probably didn't make my point clear(being treated for vertigo at present)---------- he and his wife are the extreme edge that until the other shoe hits the ground, they are holier than thou.
I don't believe that vast majority of pro-lifers feel that way. Just as the vast majority of pro-choicers are not murderous accomplishes.
I am beginning to believe the issue at the core of the "Pro-Life" movement is abstinence, not abortion. The hard-core pro-lifers are also against birth control, support abstinence-only sex-ed, and will shame any girl who gets pregnant, even if they keep the baby, because they dared to defy the rules of the fundamentalists and have sex before marriage. They oppose free distribution of things such as condoms to help prevent unwanted pregnancies. Why else would they shame teenagers who get pregnant? They should be supportive of them for keeping the baby but instead they consider them "whores" because they had sex.
That's also why they also support laws making it harder to adopt children and oppose helping those who choose to have their babies. It's not about the children. It's about controlling women. They want to make sure life is as difficult as possible for young women who have sex out of wedlock.
Now I want to say I don't think this is the case for all pro-lifers. There are some pro-life arguments I actually am sympathetic to. However, it seems the most vocal conservative pro-lifers are really about promoting a society where women stay pure until marriage, as the Bible demands.
I didn't know they oppose help to those who choose to have their babies. I'm using to the hypocrisy of Conservatives, but that's a startling example.
Probably didn't make my point clear(being treated for vertigo at present)---------- he and his wife are the extreme edge that until the other shoe hits the ground, they are holier than thou.
I don't believe that vast majority of pro-lifers feel that way. Just as the vast majority of pro-choicers are not murderous accomplishes.
I understand now. Boy, you gotta love the holy rollers. None of them ever adhere to the 'never say never' principle and it often comes back to bite them in the behind.
Hope your vertigo clears up soon - that's got to be annoying.
I don't know. That is why I am exploring the topic with you good people!
Ok. Good food for thought.
Ok. Fair. BUT. Do we not also adhere to the notion that killing is wrong? Your example is not killing if the child would die anyway. But, common or not, late term abortions ARE done casually.
I don't believe the bold. No one knows the reasons why women have late term abortions (which I consider to be beyond 20 weeks gestation).
As stated earlier I know people who have had this procedure done. All who have had it done, it was NOT done casually. Most people if they are that far along in the pregnancy, they know they are pregnant and they want a baby.
Or......one could simply believe in not insisting on making their own personal views mandatory for everyone via legislation.....
Although this is an admittedly difficult concept for some people to wrap their brain around.
If the bold is what you believe (in regards to wanting exceptions for abortion even though you claim to be "pro-life") then you actually aren't "pro-life." You are pro-choice.
The bold is how I feel about abortion. I personally would not want to do it but I don't want my personal views mandatory for all of our society.
The fact that pro-lifers want to make their personal views mandatory for the whole of society is a negative on them IMO and due to that the position is not one I respect. But I at least will respect those more who don't have this "exception" idea in their minds. If you think it is murder, it should always be murder and you shouldn't want it to occur. If you think certain circumstances/situations, that it is warranted, then you are not pro-life.
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.