Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 12-07-2019, 11:26 AM
 
Location: London
12,275 posts, read 7,133,491 times
Reputation: 13661

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by QuakerBaker View Post
The majority of souls aborted are females. Globally many abortions happen because a boy is wanted. Look at China's gender demographics.

So you are saying more men are for women's rights than women? The majority of women identify as pro-life. That isn't the case with men.




After sharply criticizing pro-life Democrats she refused to agree when asked if pro-life democrats have a place within the party and instead ripped on an elected Democrat who is pro-life.

Newsflash...only 68% of Democrats self-identify as pro-choice, 29% identify as pro-life. Throw in the independents and at least 1/3rd of her prospective voters or more will be pro-life. I won't go to Trump, but she kind of needs us to not bolt to a third party that won't demonize us as "anti-women's rights pushers."

I don't mind voting for a pro-choice Democrat who respects me. I wouldn't vote for someone who correctly points out that Trump demonizes others only to turn around and demonize me...




I am pro-life...

Because I am pro-life I support:

-A national healthcare system.

-A stronger social safety net.

-A prohibition of the death penalty.

-Vegetarians, but people having the free choice to eat all the meat they want without shame.
Since you do support a more robust social safety net and healthcare and oppose the death penalty, I believe you.

However, many of the "pro-life" folks would be just fine if a baby starved to death after being born to a mother who couldn't afford the baby. I don't call them pro-life, just anti-choice. Though not necessarily anti-women.

Then you have another subset that wants to ban sex ed in schools and make contraception less accessible (things that would help prevent abortions from even being needed) in addition to banning abortion. *Those* are the ones I'd call not only anti-choice, but actively anti-women as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-07-2019, 11:28 AM
 
11,404 posts, read 4,081,658 times
Reputation: 7852
Being pro-life means that you believe women should not be able to control what happens with their own bodies. Does it not?

I get that some feel the phrase "pro life" means that you support life 100% and don't believe in abortion, I totally get that. But that entails women not having full control over their bodies...right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2019, 01:12 PM
 
23,967 posts, read 15,063,270 times
Reputation: 12936
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeutralParty View Post
Being pro-life means that you believe women should not be able to control what happens with their own bodies. Does it not?

I get that some feel the phrase "pro life" means that you support life 100% and don't believe in abortion, I totally get that. But that entails women not having full control over their bodies...right?
IMO, plenty of women have no control over their bodies the times they say, not tonight honey I have a headache. When was marital rape made illegal?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2019, 01:19 PM
 
34,619 posts, read 21,598,192 times
Reputation: 22232
The problem with "pro-choice" is most of them want abortions to be legal right up to the very last second of a natural birth.

There is ZERO difference between killing a premature baby born after 36 weeks and aborting a viable baby at 36 weeks.

No difference.

Anyone advocate having a nurse walk into the NICU and killing preemie that aren't wanted?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2019, 01:20 PM
 
17,273 posts, read 9,551,388 times
Reputation: 16468
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
The problem with "pro-choice" is most of them want abortions to be legal right up to the very last second of a natural birth.
Really? Do you have some factual unbiased links that support your claim?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2019, 01:24 PM
 
34,619 posts, read 21,598,192 times
Reputation: 22232
Do you support laws limiting when and why a woman can have an abortion?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2019, 01:31 PM
 
Location: San Francisco
21,530 posts, read 8,716,437 times
Reputation: 64762
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
The problem with "pro-choice" is most of them want abortions to be legal right up to the very last second of a natural birth.

There is ZERO difference between killing a premature baby born after 36 weeks and aborting a viable baby at 36 weeks.

No difference.

Anyone advocate having a nurse walk into the NICU and killing preemie that aren't wanted?
Late-term abortions are extremely rare and can only be done legally when there are compelling medical reasons, such as the fetus is not viable and/or giving birth would endanger the woman's life. For example, there is a rare condition in which the (non-viable) fetus's body is stiff and rigid and can't be delivered vaginally without major damage to the mother.

Very few doctors in the U.S. are even qualified to perform late-term abortions. Most abortions are done in the first trimester except in cases when abortion is either illegal or made so difficult to obtain by restrictive laws that that women have to wait too long to get one. That happened to my parents in the 1930s when they were young, unmarried, unemployed and unable to support a child. My mother nearly died from an illegal back-alley procedure.Because of the botched procedure and the infection which followed, she was left with chronic medical problems for the rest of her life.

Anti-abortion activists like to make it sound as if women want to be able to carry a pregnancy for nine months and then suddenly decide at the last minute that they don't want it. Can you even cite one example of this ever happening? No, you can't, because it's B.S. Late term abortions should not be outlawed because, for very small number of women, the procedure is medically necessary and saves lives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2019, 01:32 PM
 
34,619 posts, read 21,598,192 times
Reputation: 22232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bayarea4 View Post
Late-term abortions are extremely rare and can only be done legally when there are compelling medical reasons, such as the fetus is not viable and/or giving birth would endanger the woman's life. For example, there is a rare condition in which the (non-viable) fetus's body is stiff and rigid and can't be delivered vaginally without major damage to the mother.

Very few doctors in the U.S. are even qualified to perform late-term abortions. Most abortions are done in the first trimester except in cases when abortion is either illegal or made so difficult to obtain by restrictive laws that that women have to wait too long to get one. That happened to my parents in the 1930s when they were young, unmarried, unemployed and unable to support a child. My mother nearly died from an illegal back-alley procedure.Because of the botched procedure and the infection which followed, she was left with chronic medical problems for the rest of her life.

Anti-abortion activists like to make it sound as if women want to be able to carry a pregnancy for nine months and then suddenly decide at the last minute that they don't want it. Can you even cite one example of this ever happening? No, you can't, because it's B.S. Late term abortions should not be outlawed because, for very small number of women, the procedure is medically necessary and saves lives.
But it's still the same thing.

The only difference is location.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2019, 01:34 PM
 
Location: San Francisco
21,530 posts, read 8,716,437 times
Reputation: 64762
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
But it's still the same thing.

The only difference is location.
Location? I don't understand what you are trying to say.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2019, 01:36 PM
 
34,619 posts, read 21,598,192 times
Reputation: 22232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bayarea4 View Post
Location? I don't understand what you are trying to say.
It's very simple.

Aborting a viable baby at 36 weeks gestation is no different than killing a preemie born after 36 weeks of gestation.

What's confusing about that.
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 $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:17 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top