Do you support Roe Vs. Wade?

SMillard said:
First off the life vs not a life thing is relative and subjective. Would the fetus survive outside the mother or if the mother died? If not, then it's not an issue to me, but that's a matter of perspective, I respect yours but apparently you don't respect mine........... that is the crux of the issue.

I don't know what percentage of tax money is used for abortion but I'm absolutely sure it's miniscule compared to how much is spent to kill living people in this country (people on death row or people killed by police) and internationally (military adventurism). Additionally, if it's a matter of paying to have a fetus aborted for a one time fee or paying for food stamps, welfare, education and any other number of things............ I'm taking the cheaper route. Again, that's my perspective I understand yours and respect it, but don't agree with forcing it on others.
Click to expand...

If people would simply remove religious thinking from this debate the decision becomes extremely easy
 
I believe in abortion up to 20-24 weeks, which is about as long as it takes for the fetus to become viable. Anything after that should be illegal unless the mother's life is in danger.
Fawlty said:
Something to notice with the "pro life" crowd - they almost never say a positive word about the rights of the woman. It gives an idea of where they are coming from, and how they view women. They also seldom (never in my experience) have a sufficient answer to the question of the woman's consent to the parasitic nature of pregnancy.

They are all about the baby until it is born, and then they can't be bothered to support the necessary social infrastructure to handle it, thereby perpetuating a cycle of poverty and crime, willingly. It is a mental disorder, the inability to resolve this cognitive dissonance, and its effects on this issue are nearly unique to religious belief, of which nearly the entire "pro-life" political movement is composed. It is deeply costly moral braying. In many cases it is outright sadism.
Click to expand...
She consented to it when she decided to have sex, which is why many pro-life people allow for an exception in the case of rape. Its not exactly a secret that sex is how babby is formed.
 
Kafir-kun said:
I believe in abortion up to 20-24 weeks, which is about as long as it takes for the fetus to become viable. Anything after that should be illegal unless the mother's life is in danger.

She consented to it when she decided to have sex, which is why many pro-life people allow for an exception in the case of rape. Its not exactly a secret that sex is how babby is formed.
Click to expand...

We do not allow 15-16 year olds to sign contracts, vote, buy alcohol, serve in the military but when it comes to making babies "she consented"??
 
IamStryker said:
all women consent to the chance of getting pregnant when they have intercourse.
Click to expand...

You can't consent to a chance, lmao. Consent is an affirmative permission for something to happen.

What you should have said was "all people take the risk of pregnancy when they have vaginal intercourse". There's a difference between taking a risk and consenting to something.

You take the risk of being in an accident every time you drive, but it's not exactly common for someone to get in their car and say "you know what today is the day I run a red light and get in an accident".
 
SMillard said:
First off the life vs not a life thing is relative and subjective. Would the fetus survive outside the mother or if the mother died? If not, then it's not an issue to me, but that's a matter of perspective, I respect yours but apparently you don't respect mine........... that is the crux of the issue.

I don't know what percentage of tax money is used for abortion but I'm absolutely sure it's miniscule compared to how much is spent to kill living people in this country (people on death row or people killed by police) and internationally (military adventurism). Additionally, if it's a matter of paying to have a fetus aborted for a one time fee or paying for food stamps, welfare, education and any other number of things............ I'm taking the cheaper route. Again, that's my perspective I understand yours and respect it, but don't agree with forcing it on others.
Click to expand...

Its a matter of valuing life and we disagree, if freedom is the excuse to commit murder at least don´t put tax payer money over it.
 
DespicablePeep said:
We would be taking a pill and fucking every slut

Woman can´t decide for shit its a life deal with it.
Click to expand...

Ya because men are so responsible. Here is an example of you making an argument that even you don't believe so it suits your narrative. Men would be having abortions left and right and you know it
 
Kafir-kun said:
I believe in abortion up to 20-24 weeks, which is about as long as it takes for the fetus to become viable. Anything after that should be illegal unless the mother's life is in danger.

She consented to it when she decided to have sex, which is why many pro-life people allow for an exception in the case of rape. Its not exactly a secret that sex is how babby is formed.
Click to expand...
God awful argument when so many get pregnant on accident and the vast majority of sex is not procreative. Just ghastly, man. I expect much better.
 
zebby23 said:
We do not allow 15-16 year olds to sign contracts, vote, buy alcohol, serve in the military but when it comes to making babies "she consented"??
Click to expand...
Boys who have been victims of statutory rape have been made to pay child support despite the fact that the law clearly recognizes that they were raped so you can still be held liable for something you didn't legally consent to. Besides, 16 is the age of consent in many states.
Fawlty said:
God awful argument when so many get pregnant on accident and the vast majority of sex is not procreative. Just ghastly, man. I expect much better.
Click to expand...
Just because it didn't happen entirely on purpose doesn't mean you shouldn't be held liable. If a man impregnates a woman accidentally he can and likely will be held liable even if, as I pointed out above, the law clearly recognizes that he was raped.

The woman's situation is not entirely analogous and I do think women should have the right to abort the fetus in the first trimester but I do not have much sympathy for women complaining about the parasitism of their fetus when it was a natural and predictable consequence of their own behavior.
 
zebby23 said:
If people would simply remove religious thinking from this debate the decision becomes extremely easy
Click to expand...
So, you seriously believe it's strictly religious-type advocating pro-life?
 
Smok3r said:
So, you seriously believe it's strictly religious-type advocating pro-life?
Click to expand...

Mostly.... yes. Take the religious argument out of it and I think there is a discussion to be had. There is no discussion with people who believe life starts at conception. That is simply nonsense and research will tell you the same
 
Smok3r said:
So, you seriously believe it's strictly religious-type advocating pro-life?
Click to expand...
Zebby can answer for himself but yeah, that's pretty much right.

http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/religious-family/atheist/views-about-abortion/

http://www.pewforum.org/2009/01/15/abortion-views-by-religious-affiliation/

Obviously it doesn't explain it for everyone (nothing ever does) but there is a gigantic gap on the issue between religious and non-believers on the topic.
 
zebby23 said:
Mostly.... yes. Take the religious argument out of it and I think there is a discussion to be had. There is no discussion with people who believe life starts at conception. That is simply nonsense and research will tell you the same
Click to expand...
It has to start somewhere, right?
 
Kafir-kun said:
Boys who have been victims of statutory rape have been made to pay child support despite the fact that the law clearly recognizes that they were raped so you can still be held liable for something you didn't legally consent to. Besides, 16 is the age of consent in many states.

Just because it didn't happen entirely on purpose doesn't mean you shouldn't be held liable. If a man impregnates a woman accidentally he can and likely will be held liable even if, as I pointed out above, the law clearly recognizes that he was raped. The woman's situation is not entirely analogous and I do think women should have the right to abort the fetus in the first trimester but I do not have much sympathy for women complaining about the parasitism of their fetus when it was a natural and predictable consequence of their own behavior.
Click to expand...
That doesn't really hold up either. When we do something that has a small chance of unintended, life-changing consequences, we aren't "consenting" to have the problem happen. That your sympathy disappears sounds to me like vestigial religion, a mildly sadistic impulse against a transgression upon the moral aether, some real bronze age holdover stuff. Her ongoing consent > religious crap.
 
zebby23 said:
Nope

Also prove it
Click to expand...
Every atheist on YouTube seems to have a cat and/or dog.

The point I was getting at is that the same people who don't give a @#$% about flushing a baby down a drain, are the same people who nearly @#$% their pants with joy when they find out that "Whiskers" is expecting kittens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,947
Messages
58,330,069
Members
176,001
Latest member
batty

Share this page

Back
Top