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.
Did you not even bother reading my response? My differentiation is based on a "lesser of two evils" concept. As for your scenario presented here, the time for a rape victim to decide not to carry the rapist's baby to term is while the baby is still in utero. Murdering a two-year-old is murder, period, regardless of how she was conceived. And there is no "greater evil" to justify it.
How is murder the lesser evil? My point is that it's not murder until the devoloping fetus is viable. Even you are drawing the distinction between a fertilized egg and a fully developed human being.
Maybe I misunderstood then. If you don't believe it's murder then what is your objection?
It's weird that you think murder is preferable to forcing a rape victim to carry a child. So you do see a moral problem with forcing a woman to carry a child but just not for women who weren't raped.
Last edited by L8Gr8Apost8; 06-30-2022 at 12:57 PM..
As to the 11 yr old, why do people bring up the 1/100 of 1% to try and justify abortion? Will you be happy if allowances are made for this? I agree they should be, but would you be content to ban abortion except in cases of rape, incest and such? Or is this just another "well , what about?!!!!"
As to the adult, if they got pregnant by a consensual decision to have sex, let them be adult about it and make the required effort to go where needed for an abortion if they want one. Its called taking adult responsibility for your actions.
Politicians have to make policies to address these scenarios. The answers conservatives give to these questions are repugnant to most women.
“The 12 year old rape victim is not common don’t worry about it.”
“If poor women can’t enjoy the same access to healthcare as wealthier women that’s their fault for being poor.”
I just want people who are on the fence to contemplate how callous these type of responses are and vote appropriately.
Also do you want to raise taxes to feed and clothe These children? I have noticed the people who care so much about the sanctity of life don’t like to pay for social programs
Politicians have to make policies to address these scenarios. The answers conservatives give to these questions are repugnant to most women.
“The 12 year old rape victim is not common don’t worry about it.”
“If poor women can’t enjoy the same access to healthcare as wealthier women that’s their fault for being poor.”
I just want people who are on the fence to contemplate how callous these type of responses are and vote appropriately.
Also do you want to raise taxes to feed and clothe These children? I have noticed the people who care so much about the sanctity of life don’t like to pay for social programs
All of your responses attributed to conservatives are hyperbolic extremes of what they actually say. This is one of the issues that has polarized this national debate so much, from both sides, the other side wanting to label the pro choice crowd baby killers and such. We are where we are because of this sort of dishonest dialogue in which neither side tries to understand the other.
Yes, we should make exceptions for rape. And incest, the mothers health, and even obvious birth defects in my opinion. But the left wants to cite these rare instances as justification for ALL women getting abortions on demand, and the pro life crowd doesnt buy it.
As to social programs, more hyperbole. The right wishes there to be some responsibility and effort from the needy when they get help. The right doesn't want assistance to be a lifelong and cultural thing that gets passed down generation to generation. They don't want those getting assistance buying candy, alcohol, top dollar steaks and so on. And they don't want to see people selling their assistance vouchers for cash. And dont make the bogus claim this doesn't happen. Social services people admit it does.
So yes,the right is not as willing to fling money at the needy because they see that it gets abused and wasted quite often. Wanting there to be some responsibility and some effort from the recipients does not equate to hard and callous attitudes towards the poor.
Not that I ever really expect to get into an honest and serious debate here that sticks to facts and not hyperbole. That is expecting too much from both sides.
All of your responses attributed to conservatives are hyperbolic extremes of what they actually say. This is one of the issues that has polarized this national debate so much, from both sides, the other side wanting to label the pro choice crowd baby killers and such. We are where we are because of this sort of dishonest dialogue in which neither side tries to understand the other.
Yes, we should make exceptions for rape. And incest, the mothers health, and even obvious birth defects in my opinion. But the left wants to cite these rare instances as justification for ALL women getting abortions on demand, and the pro life crowd doesnt buy it.
As to social programs, more hyperbole. The right wishes there to be some responsibility and effort from the needy when they get help. The right doesn't want assistance to be a lifelong and cultural thing that gets passed down generation to generation. They don't want those getting assistance buying candy, alcohol, top dollar steaks and so on. And they don't want to see people selling their assistance vouchers for cash. And dont make the bogus claim this doesn't happen. Social services people admit it does.
So yes,the right is not as willing to fling money at the needy because they see that it gets abused and wasted quite often. Wanting there to be some responsibility and some effort from the recipients does not equate to hard and callous attitudes towards the poor.
Not that I ever really expect to get into an honest and serious debate here that sticks to facts and not hyperbole. That is expecting too much from both sides.
No, the problem is that people can't tell an opinion from a fact. It doesn't matter what a person believes about abortion as long as they understand that they can only apply it to themselves. We don't spend time debating actual murder because everyone agrees it's wrong.
All of your responses attributed to conservatives are hyperbolic extremes of what they actually say. This is one of the issues that has polarized this national debate so much, from both sides, the other side wanting to label the pro choice crowd baby killers and such. We are where we are because of this sort of dishonest dialogue in which neither side tries to understand the other.
Yes, we should make exceptions for rape. And incest, the mothers health, and even obvious birth defects in my opinion. But the left wants to cite these rare instances as justification for ALL women getting abortions on demand, and the pro life crowd doesnt buy it.
As to social programs, more hyperbole. The right wishes there to be some responsibility and effort from the needy when they get help. The right doesn't want assistance to be a lifelong and cultural thing that gets passed down generation to generation. They don't want those getting assistance buying candy, alcohol, top dollar steaks and so on. And they don't want to see people selling their assistance vouchers for cash. And dont make the bogus claim this doesn't happen. Social services people admit it does.
So yes,the right is not as willing to fling money at the needy because they see that it gets abused and wasted quite often. Wanting there to be some responsibility and some effort from the recipients does not equate to hard and callous attitudes towards the poor.
Not that I ever really expect to get into an honest and serious debate here that sticks to facts and not hyperbole. That is expecting too much from both sides.
You are mistaken when you suggest pro choice wants to justify all abortions because some women are victims of incest, rape or their health is in danger. These situations are brought up when anti choice wants abortion outlawed not as justification for all abortions, but to remind you the restrictions will also impact victims of rape and incest
All of your responses attributed to conservatives are hyperbolic extremes of what they actually say. This is one of the issues that has polarized this national debate so much, from both sides, the other side wanting to label the pro choice crowd baby killers and such. We are where we are because of this sort of dishonest dialogue in which neither side tries to understand the other.
Yes, we should make exceptions for rape. And incest, the mothers health, and even obvious birth defects in my opinion. But the left wants to cite these rare instances as justification for ALL women getting abortions on demand, and the pro life crowd doesnt buy it.
As to social programs, more hyperbole. The right wishes there to be some responsibility and effort from the needy when they get help. The right doesn't want assistance to be a lifelong and cultural thing that gets passed down generation to generation. They don't want those getting assistance buying candy, alcohol, top dollar steaks and so on. And they don't want to see people selling their assistance vouchers for cash. And dont make the bogus claim this doesn't happen. Social services people admit it does.
So yes,the right is not as willing to fling money at the needy because they see that it gets abused and wasted quite often. Wanting there to be some responsibility and some effort from the recipients does not equate to hard and callous attitudes towards the poor.
Not that I ever really expect to get into an honest and serious debate here that sticks to facts and not hyperbole. That is expecting too much from both sides.
Are you freaking serious!?!? The governor of South Dakota,the speaker of the Mississippi house and the governor of Missouri went on national media in the last week and said they don’t want exceptions for rape and incest. These are high ranking political leaders in the Republican Party. Of the last eight presidents four have been governors.When asked specifically about teenage rape victims and incest they said they want abortion illegal for teenage and preteen rape victims. how is pointing out what they say hyperbolic extremes when they are elected leaders in your party.
You are mistaken when you suggest pro choice wants to justify all abortions because some women are victims of incest, rape or their health is in danger. These situations are brought up when anti choice wants abortion outlawed not as justification for all abortions, but to remind you the restrictions will also impact victims of rape and incest
Absolutely not true. No pro choice group would ever agree to allowing abortions under these limited circumstances but not in any other ones, and you know it. To even pretend otherwise is ludicrous .
Absolutely not true. No pro choice group would ever agree to allowing abortions under these limited circumstances but not in any other ones, and you know it. To even pretend otherwise is ludicrous .
You suggested pro choice justifies abortion for all because of rape incest and health. Pro choice doesn’t justify the reasons women abort. We believe in choice. It’s up to the woman the why’s of her abortion.
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.
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.
