RE: The Deviding Issue-Palin's veiw Abortion

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: The Deviding Issue-Palin's veiw Abortion

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: The Deviding Issue-Palin's veiw Abortion

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The Deviding Issue-Palin's veiw Abortion - 9/10/2008 8:12:03 PM

caitlyn

Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline

General ... and in the spirit of everyone minding their own fucking business.

What I find interesting, is the "pro-choice" elitists, offering harsh comments because someone made a personal choice against abortion, even to the point of making comments not worthy of a Middle School playground, like "...and we wonder how her daughter got knocked up?"

Governor Palin's opinion, which I share, will not change Roe vs. Wade. Only a majority opinion would change that, and people would still get abortions ... just not with our tax dollars. Using this issue to promote the agenda of the left, just is what it is ... and thats not much.

So, people can get their abortions in a dirty alley for all I care ... perhaps they would be more rare, if they were more dangerous. They are certainly quite dangerous for the unborn.

Cait, the Pro-Life Democrat.

_____________________________

I wish I could buy back ...
the woman you stole.

(in reply to Racquelle)

Post #: 81

RE: The Deviding Issue-Palin's veiw Abortion - 9/10/2008 8:21:57 PM

corysub

Posts: 1492
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: subtee

quote:

ORIGINAL: corysub
Bad sub! :(

I think what we decided was that while abortion was important, other issues could be better addressed by McCain/Palin. The choice was between Obama and McCain as leaders of the country we could feel comfortable with for the future. Obama is unproven and very risky in these difficult times. Shrugs. Only our view and others have their key button pushing concerns.

I'm sorry, that wasn't kind at all. I'm sure you're a very good sub.

NP....hugggz

(in reply to subtee)

Post #: 82

RE: The Deviding Issue-Palin's veiw Abortion - 9/11/2008 12:15:21 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

So, people can get their abortions in a dirty alley for all I care ... perhaps they would be more rare, if they were more dangerous. They are certainly quite dangerous for the unborn.

Cait, the Pro-Life Democrat.

I doubt it. There seems to be one consistent throughout history, when women are pregnant there is a section for whatever reason, will take the abortion option and no amount of social and legal pressure will make a difference.

I remember archeologists digging in a monastry near where I was brought up found quite a few dead babies which were thought to have been fathered by the monks and given birth by the nuns of a convent near by.

Women naturally abort everyday. It seems to me that god has something to answer for too if women have to.

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to caitlyn)

Post #: 83

RE: The Deviding Issue-Palin's veiw Abortion - 9/11/2008 5:29:11 AM

kittinSol

Posts: 16926
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

So, people can get their abortions in a dirty alley for all I care ... perhaps they would be more rare, if they were more dangerous. They are certainly quite dangerous for the unborn.

A lovely sentiment, a compassionate, medically sound option.

_____________________________

(in reply to caitlyn)

Post #: 84

RE: The Deviding Issue-Palin's veiw Abortion - 9/11/2008 5:54:48 AM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

So, people can get their abortions in a dirty alley for all I care ... perhaps they would be more rare, if they were more dangerous. They are certainly quite dangerous for the unborn.

Wow, just wow, totally gobsmacked here
Lucy

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to caitlyn)

Post #: 85

RE: The Deviding Issue-Palin's veiw Abortion - 9/11/2008 5:57:53 AM

kittinSol

Posts: 16926
Status: offline

You too, huh? It's the kind of blind anger that scares the hell out of me

.

_____________________________

(in reply to Lucylastic)

Post #: 86

RE: The Deviding Issue-Palin's veiw Abortion - 9/11/2008 6:04:15 AM

Lynnxz

Posts: 4813
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Atlanta
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

So, people can get their abortions in a dirty alley for all I care ... perhaps they would be more rare, if they were more dangerous. They are certainly quite dangerous for the unborn.

Cait, the Pro-Life Democrat.

Sweet. Now, instead of just an abortion, now we have a woman dying of septicemia, because she just had a coathanger rammed around up there. Great idea.
While Roe vs Wade was still being screwed around with, they estimate illegal abortions were at something around 1.2 million per year.

< Message edited by Lynnxz -- 9/11/2008 6:06:40 AM >

_____________________________

HBIC

(in reply to caitlyn)

Post #: 87

RE: The Deviding Issue-Palin's veiw Abortion - 9/11/2008 6:17:01 AM

kittinSol

Posts: 16926
Status: offline

The anti-choice doctrine knows best, ignore medical advice or a woman's medical needs, bypass the opinion of the medical doctors, because her life is secondary: the fetus comes first. Always, because if you make an exception to that rule, the rule becomes meaningless.

_____________________________

(in reply to Lynnxz)

Post #: 88

RE: The Deviding Issue-Palin's veiw Abortion - 9/11/2008 6:40:38 AM

chiaThePet

Posts: 2694
Joined: 2/4/2007
Status: offline

Oh sure, let's all get wrapped up in the cause celeb when we have that comment,

"If You Put Earings On A Chicken, It's Still A Chicken" being flung out there.

Priorities people, priorities.

chia* (the pet)

_____________________________

Love is a many splendid sting.

You can stick me in the corner, but I'll probably just end up coloring on the walls.

(in reply to kittinSol)

Post #: 89

RE: The Dividing Issue-Palin's view Abortion - 9/11/2008 7:10:54 AM

Mercnbeth

Posts: 11766
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol
The anti-choice doctrine knows best, ignore medical advice or a woman's medical needs, bypass the opinion of the medical doctors, because her life is secondary: the fetus comes first. Always, because if you make an exception to that rule, the rule becomes meaningless.

The pro-death doctrine knows best, ignore medical advice or a baby's medical needs, bypass the opinion of the medical doctors, because the baby's life is secondary: the mother comes first. Always, because if you make an exception to that rule, the rule becomes meaningless.

Just saying, the converse works just as well? What's the difference?

quote:

While Roe vs Wade was still being screwed around with, they estimate illegal abortions were at something around 1.2 million per year.

You don't show any reference t confirm your number, but based upon numbers provided by Planned Parenthood legalization hasn't changed that number. In the last year reported, 2004 the number was 1.3 Million.
Source: http://www.abortiontv.com/Misc/AbortionStatistics.htm#United%20States

A better argument may have been access. Stories from back in the day, would highlight that middle/upper class woman had no problem with access; the poor working class didn't.

From the same source:

3% involved the mother's health
1% involved the baby's health
1% involved rape
95% were a matter of birth control

I'm not running for anything, don't think a 'pay grade' should impact an opinion, and I am not insecure; so I'll represent myself as 'pro-choice', 'pro-death' (pick one); but it would seem by the numbers that better birth control options should be the target for those on the 'pro-life' side. However I won't subscribe to the semantic argument or the juvenile distinction of labeling a unborn baby a 'fetus' so that it makes the person more comfortable killing it. Taking its first breath occurs at conception, even if that 'breath' comes from an umbilical cord. Its human at birth, inside its internal egg shell its also human. Sorry if I can't equate it to a chicken egg when its scrambled. Yet I have no problem given anyone the opportunity to do so.
.
There should be available access. The difficult choice should be personal. Medical providers shouldn't be forced to perform, or not perform; based upon their own decision. This is one case where a 'vote' of the majority should not be the defining 'right' or 'wrong'. I'd stand behind and support the status quo. I'm against any law inhibiting an individuals personal freedom of choice; whether that choice is to kill an unborn baby or wear a seatbelt. Callous? Perhaps; but pragmatically not hypocritical. Want to make the argument that the baby doesn't get a choice? Putting that criteria into the equation and you'll be allowed to terminate the life, in some cases, up to age 18.

(in reply to kittinSol)

Post #: 90

RE: The Dividing Issue-Palin's view Abortion - 9/11/2008 7:47:05 AM

kittinSol

Posts: 16926
Status: offline

I ask that you don't quote me on things I haven't said, notably this:

"While Roe vs Wade was still being screwed around with, they estimate illegal abortions were at something around 1.2 million per year."

A fetus is a fetus, and before that, it is an embryo. Those are the appropriate medical terms. You, together with the entire "pro-life" lobby, choose to sentimentalise it by calling it "a baby", and to describe an abortion as "a killing". I find your pretence to be sitting on the fence and of being neutral disingenuous: "pro-death", what a lot of shit. At least, you could have the courage of your opinion and be clear about what you believe in. Right now, with its "pro-life" rhetoric and vocabulary, your post is full of hypocrisy and self-satisfaction.

I have come to the conclusion that as a woman is a living and independent being, her life comes before that of something that is entirely dependent on her body to survive - sometimes, abortion is an act of self-defence. It's not simple, it's not easy, it's difficult. It's tough, just like life is.

And guess what? You don't have to worry about it, because you'll never have to make that decision. But I can assure you of one thing: I have yet to meet one woman who skipped over to the clinic with a singing heart and a spring in her step, notwithstanding your 'statistics' that attempt to make it look like most women choose abortion for trivial reasons. Ever had one? It's no fun.

Enjoy the rides you're getting: your physical integrity won't ever be at risk from sex, so if it makes you feel good about yourself, bask away in your mistaken feelings of masculine superiority.

_____________________________

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 91

RE: The Dividing Issue-Palin's view Abortion - 9/11/2008 8:09:15 AM

Mercnbeth

Posts: 11766
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

I ask that you don't quote me on things I haven't said, notably this:

"While Roe vs Wade was still being screwed around with, they estimate illegal abortions were at something around 1.2 million per year."

A fetus is a fetus, and before that, it is an embryo. Those are the appropriate medical terms. You, together with the entire "pro-life" lobby, choose to sentimentalise it by calling it "a baby", and to describe an abortion as "a killing". I find your pretence to be sitting on the fence and of being neutral disingenuous: "pro-death", what a lot of shit. At least, you could have the courage of your opinion and be clear about what you believe in. Right now, with its "pro-life" rhetoric and vocabulary, your post is full of hypocrisy and self-satisfaction.

I have come to the conclusion that as a woman is a living and independent being, her life comes before that of something that is entirely dependent on her body to survive - sometimes, abortion is an act of self-defence. It's not simple, it's not easy, it's difficult. It's tough, just like life is.

And guess what? You don't have to worry about it, because you'll never have to make that decision. But I can assure you of one thing: I have yet to meet one woman who skipped over to the clinic with a singing heart and a spring in her step, notwithstanding your 'statistics' that attempt to make it look like most women choose abortion for trivial reasons. Ever had one? It's no fun.

Enjoy the rides you're getting: your physical integrity won't ever be at risk from sex, so if it makes you feel good about yourself, bask away in your mistaken feelings of masculine superiority.

Next time read the post, or at least try to understand it so you don't look so foolish, KS. I think the source of the quotes used, one yours and the other 'Lynnxz' was obvious. CM only brings one into the copy/paste click on 'Quote' tab. But with all the time you spend on the forums you know that. Why make it an issue?

"My statistics"? No - official statistics. Troubling yourself to go to the reference you would have seen reasons provided on the same site. "Singing" or humming, the bottom line is the same - why should that come into the discussion? Why in your mind is the reason given 95% of the time - 'birth control' - trivial? Its neither trivial or important - it's a factual reported result from a source that facilitates without judgment a woman's ability to terminate a pregnancy. Contact them and make an argument that their result is "trivial" if you like.

I'll put it simply for you, I'm for your right to choose but won't stand behind your rationalization of labeling the result of the activity which is the killing of a baby, a 'medical procedure'. At minimum try to develop the character necessary to stand up for your position no matter how difficult the appropriate referencing words make it.

I forgot - your agenda is that everyone think your way and not be allowed a differing perspective or position. I note that you need to reduce the discussion to insult and cursing. Why is a different label expressing the same position as yours troubling you to the point of needing to do so?

I am not sitting on any fence on the issue. I'm neutral in the debate. I see the points and could add to them on either side. However, my position on the freedom of choice on this and any issue should be clear - I FOR personal choice, personal responsibility, personal accountability. If a national law was passed based upon an amendment labeled 'Legalized pre-viable baby killing' would you oppose it? Why? I wouldn't. The result is your goal - how can a label make a difference?

Oh, and Yes - I very much am enjoying "the ride" - THANKS!

(in reply to kittinSol)

Post #: 92

RE: The Dividing Issue-Palin's view Abortion - 9/11/2008 9:01:46 AM

kittinSol

Posts: 16926
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

I'm for your right to choose but won't stand behind your rationalization of labeling the result of the activity which is the killing of a baby, a 'medical procedure'. At minimum try to develop the character necessary to stand up for your position no matter how difficult the appropriate referencing words make it.

And where do you get your rationalisation that a pregnancy is a 'baby'? Your neutrality is in question when you use incendiary language in the abortion debate, when you call it an "activity", as if it were a hobby, when you name a pregnancy a "baby", when it's medically not yet one, and when you call a medical termination a "killing", when it's neither a murder, nor an execution. But you know all this, since your agression is deliberate. God knows why you engage me in conversation, since I am obviously trying to rob you of your freedom of speech in retribution

. Me, I'll continue being an unrepentant baby killer.

_____________________________

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 93

RE: The Dividing Issue-Palin's view Abortion - 9/11/2008 9:13:29 AM

Mercnbeth

Posts: 11766
Status: offline

quote:

God knows why you engage me in conversation

As with most everything I do out of a business context - I enjoy it. You must too based on our many exchanges. Is your fundamental belief that any disagreement or, as in this case, agreement using different words, a form of "aggression"? Although I will stipulate the words are deliberate, it begs the question - aren't yours?

quote:

Your neutrality is in question when you use incendiary language in the abortion debate,

Opinion not base on anything. In fact it contradicts my stated, restated, and stated again position; I'm FOR personal decisions without governmental intervention on this and just about ANY issue - You? Why are words troubling to you obtaining the same result?

quote:

I am obviously trying to rob you of your freedom of speech in retribution .

You are? I missed that.

quote:

Me, I'll continue being an unrepentant baby killer.

And I'll continue to make sure you, and anyone else making a similar decision, have the right to do so.

(in reply to kittinSol)

Post #: 94

RE: The Deviding Issue-Palin's veiw Abortion - 9/11/2008 9:42:09 AM

Owner59

Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline

So, people can get their abortions in a dirty alley for all I care ... perhaps they would be more rare, if they were more dangerous. They are certainly quite dangerous for the unborn.

One of the most frightening things I`ve read on a board.

I don`t think you get it.

I would kindly ask you to leave my party.

< Message edited by Owner59 -- 9/11/2008 10:08:04 AM >

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to caitlyn)

Post #: 95

RE: The Dividing Issue-Palin's view Abortion - 9/11/2008 10:13:57 AM

philosophy

Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

While Roe vs Wade was still being screwed around with, they estimate illegal abortions were at something around 1.2 million per year.

You don't show any reference t confirm your number, but based upon numbers provided by Planned Parenthood legalization hasn't changed that number. In the last year reported, 2004 the number was 1.3 Million.

...ok, let's take that as a given. Roe v Wade had no measurable effect on abortion rates. What we can say then is that Roe v Wade has had its greatest effect on the survival rate of the mother. i have no idea what sort of percentage of women died from needless complications when abortion was illegal, but i have no problem asserting that that number is now much lower.
Pro-life? Ergo, Roe v Wade has saved lives. Just not the lives you're thinking of probably......

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 96

RE: The Dividing Issue-Palin's view Abortion - 9/11/2008 10:48:32 AM

Ialdabaoth

Posts: 1073
Joined: 5/4/2008
From: Tempe, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

Pro-life? Ergo, Roe v Wade has saved lives. Just not the lives you're thinking of probably......

Ok! So then, let's hone in on the part of the debate that's been strongly implied by the "abortions should be dangerous" quip, but that no one has hit head-on yet:

Did those lives deserve to be saved?

(in reply to philosophy)

Post #: 97

RE: The Dividing Issue-Palin's view Abortion - 9/11/2008 12:34:25 PM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

Would you mind explaining that question? are you talking about women who have had abortions?
No Im not thick, Im just making sure I have the right end of the stick and verifying ...
Lucy

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Ialdabaoth)

Post #: 98

RE: The Dividing Issue-Palin's view Abortion - 9/11/2008 1:49:50 PM

Mercnbeth

Posts: 11766
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

While Roe vs Wade was still being screwed around with, they estimate illegal abortions were at something around 1.2 million per year.

You don't show any reference t confirm your number, but based upon numbers provided by Planned Parenthood legalization hasn't changed that number. In the last year reported, 2004 the number was 1.3 Million.

...ok, let's take that as a given. Roe v Wade had no measurable effect on abortion rates. What we can say then is that Roe v Wade has had its greatest effect on the survival rate of the mother. i have no idea what sort of percentage of women died from needless complications when abortion was illegal, but i have no problem asserting that that number is now much lower.
Pro-life? Ergo, Roe v Wade has saved lives. Just not the lives you're thinking of probably......

philo,
I see no point to debate. This is the aspect I've mentioned when it comes to neutrality. If there is any challenge it is the the 1.2 million, at the time, illegal abortions done prior to Roe v. Wade. When I went to find a verifiable source for abortions currently being conducted, I was surprised that the number from Planned Parenthood was so close to the number the poster reported for pre Roe v. Wade. I thought there would be more. However, since its verification had no relevance to my point, I didn't bother with validating someone else's representation.

To your question - the survival rate of the mother? I don't think that can be answered. I doubt that any doctor conducting an illegal abortion would report a death caused by his actions. On the other side, I don't know how many woman die or are somehow incapacitated by having a legal abortion. No medical procedure is ever 100% 'safe'.

By the same token, this isn't a chicken egg being scrambled its a human egg; which if allowed, would be a human. Call it anything you want from conception to birth - that's reality. I don't think its label; zygote, fetus, baby, human; makes a bit of difference. Why hide from that reality or rationalize it as anything different? There seems to be a problem killing a 'baby', but no problem killing a 'fetus'. Is the reference the problem or the act? Would calling a woman an 'incubator' be insulting?

Hoping that someone will continue to read this part...

I fully support a woman's right to turn off the incubator. I don't think there should be a change to Roe v. Wade. I would be active against any initiative seeking to change the status quo. To your point, whether fewer woman died of complications from illegal abortions than do during the legally conducted procedure would not change my position on the issue.

(in reply to philosophy)

Post #: 99

RE: The Dividing Issue-Palin's view Abortion - 9/11/2008 3:28:12 PM

cpK69

Posts: 1593
Joined: 5/9/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

I fully support a woman's right to turn off the incubator.

I've read the whole thread through, but thought I'd keep my response simple; thank you, Merc.

Kim

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 100

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: The Deviding Issue-Palin's veiw Abortion

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.094