In case some of you dont know, the Supreme Court has already ruled on abortion. Also, Republicans are slimy bastards.

[ecogen]

You must have missed many P&N arguments over the years then.

Maybe, I sure didn't miss this one though and I didn't miss how hypocritical what you're saying is. You're trying to convince us that you supposedly care about "human life" and then when shown that certain behaviours cause far more "deaths", according to your definition, you hand wave that away and say it's okay because "there's no moral offence" as if that changes the result.
You don't give a shit about life at least have the balls to own up to it.

 

[MrSquished]

I'm not a conservatard. I don't vote based on single issues. I am not projecting, unlike kage, I do have deeply held beliefs that I only change when the preponderance of requires me to. I changed from a Republican to a Democrat, and have voted that way, because I became convinced that the democrats were trying to do more good than the republicans - who are only helping a narrow slice of Americans. I'm thinking of changing to an 'Independent'** just because I do not like the 'litmus test' of pro-abortion only that seems present in the democratic party. I don't pass that particular test. Climate change, universal healthcare, expansion of the social safety net with particular emphasis on the poor and working women (day care), etc., are all issues that deeply matter to me. Ya'll are judging me based on ONE particular issue - which is why I call it a litmus test. It's insanity that I cannot disagree with fellow democrats on one issue without being thrown to the wolves. I do not understand how it is that you cannot hear me. Or that none of you seems to know my posting history in P&N.

** Note, I didn't say 'Republican'. For crying out loud.

I respect your decision to switch to independent. Just one thing, you call the democratic position pro-abortion. That's just not right, it's pro-choice. Language makes a big difference. Democrats are also for expanding sex education and access to birth control products, etc
.. Things that prevent the need for abortions. So no, they are not pro-abortion because that implies the wrong things.

 

[kage69]

I'm not a conservatard. I don't vote based on single issues. I am not projecting, unlike kage, I do have deeply held beliefs that I only change when the preponderance of requires me to.

What are you talking about? You're sure acting like a conservatard; I don't see you quoting my post and asking for clarification or elaboration, and my history here of admitting error when wrong or changing my position in lieu of better data isn't acknowledged at all. Yet here you are trying to make me sound like a magat. I used to be a republican too, did you know that?

Happy to clear up any confusion for you Ajay, or you can fuck off and quit being a little bitch, that would also work. If me referencing the hypocrisy of the anti-choice crowd causes you to make indignantly stupid posts, maybe that's something you should explore a little more.

 

[Fenixgoon]

I respect your decision to switch to independent. Just one thing, you call the democratic position pro-abortion. That's just not right, it's pro-choice. Language makes a big difference. Democrats are also for expanding sex education and access to birth control products, etc
.. Things that prevent the need for abortions. So no, they are not pro-abortion because that implies the wrong things.

So, so, so much this.

I suspect both sides (tm) would agree that reducing abortions is a good thing.

The difference being, the conservative position is to ban abortion altogether - taking away the supply but not the demand. The liberal position is to improve sex education and increase access to birth control, reducing the demand for abortions in the first place, and "supply" would drop accordingly.

 

[ch33zw1z]

I agree. I was raised with pro-choice being "pro-abortion" . Really just a straw man argument in chant form.

 

[Ajay]

What are you talking about? You're sure acting like a conservatard; I don't see you quoting my post and asking for clarification or elaboration, and my history here of admitting error when wrong or changing my position in lieu of better data isn't acknowledged at all. Yet here you are trying to make me sound like a magat. I used to be a republican too, did you know that?

Happy to clear up any confusion for you Ajay, or you can fuck off and quit being a little bitch, that would also work. If me referencing the hypocrisy of the anti-choice crowd causes you to make stupid posts, maybe that's something you should explore a little more.

I worded that sentence badly. I meant no offense, you have my apologies.Sorry I pissed you off. I don’t think you are a magat, far from it. Didn’t know you were a Republican, it’s actually good to hear since that party is just wandering off into the deep end.

I'm done arguing about the abortion issue here on ATPN. I’m not good at it and it just causes allot of rancor. There is no need for more of that here.

 

[JD50]

I'm not a conservatard. I don't vote based on single issues. I am not projecting, unlike kage, I do have deeply held beliefs that I only change when the preponderance of requires me to. I changed from a Republican to a Democrat, and have voted that way, because I became convinced that the democrats were trying to do more good than the republicans - who are only helping a narrow slice of Americans. I'm thinking of changing to an 'Independent'** just because I do not like the 'litmus test' of pro-abortion only that seems present in the democratic party. I don't pass that particular test. Climate change, universal healthcare, expansion of the social safety net with particular emphasis on the poor and working women (day care), etc., are all issues that deeply matter to me. Ya'll are judging me based on ONE particular issue - which is why I call it a litmus test. It's insanity that I cannot disagree with fellow democrats on one issue without being thrown to the wolves. I do not understand how it is that you cannot hear me. Or that none of you seems to know my posting history in P&N.

** Note, I didn't say 'Republican'. For crying out loud.

The projection I'm talking about is when you claim no one's mind is going to be changed. You should always be open to having your mind changed, the reason you're not in this case is most likely religious indoctrination. You would be better off dropping that garbage, as would the rest of the world.

 

[Ajay]

I’ll give you the same offer I have Ajay, I’ll do everything I can to make sure no ones forces you to have an abortion and I’ll vote against any politician that supports forcing you or anyone else having an abortion. Will you do the same for me and do everything you can to stop above anyone from forcing anyone to have a baby and will you vote against any politician that supports forcing anyone to have a baby?

Shane we're just never going to agree, let's just leave it at that.

 

[Ajay]

The projection I'm talking about is when you claim no one's mind is going to be changed. You should always be open to having your mind changed, the reason you're not in this case is most likely religious indoctrination. You would be better off dropping that garbage, as would the rest of the world.

I was opposed to abortion before I converted because I didn’t see any added social value in it and considered it potentially harmful to societal cohesion and our economic future. As an adult convert no one indoctrinated me. I just found additional moral reasons to object to it and became convinced it was a heinous act that should be illegal in most cases. I understand that the majority of people disagree with me.

 

[dank69]

Democrats claim to be free of the dogmatic yolk that holds Republicans as barbarians.

Yet in this case there is not a compromise presented, offered, or wanted? On the case of murdering children you convince yourselves that they are not human. Not worth consideration. Even one minute before birth. Somehow you think in an absolute. Right / wrong. Just as stupid as those who say "child" at conception, you would stand here and tell me fetus the day before they are born?

The age of viability is expanding with science. I do object to any argument telling us that killing a child at 7 months of pregnancy is not murder. Now sometimes there is a medical necessity. That part is obvious. What isn't obvious is why you are not willing to delve into the grey aspects of this, argue over when the line is crossed, and help find a compromise based on the age of gestation. To help ensure that this is done with humane consideration, without blind and wanton murder, or sidelining the mother's needs.

You could join me in finding reason with compromise, instead of reaching for that emotional reactionary response that Republicans are all too known for. You do not have to stoop to their level and counter with a measure of equal stupidity and ignorance. Yes, it is a child before they are born. No, it is not a child at conception. The earlier we can get it done - the better. Reasonable people should reach into that grey area, figure out a timeline that makes sense, and call it what it is with moral clarity. Making sure that this is handled in the most efficient and humane way possible.

Once again, the basis for the pro-choice position does not rest on the classification of the embryo as human. That is a straw man. The pro-choice position rests on the moral foundation that no human has a right to occupy space inside another human. The pro-choice position rests on the moral foundation that a person has the right to decide if they want to allow another human to live inside them and take nutrients from them. If you would support a law preventing me from taking your blood without your consent even if it would save someone else's life, then you must support a law giving women that same respect for autonomy.

Now, we also recognize that maybe there needs to be some sort of balance between the right to autonomy and abject cruelty. I do not think you will find many people willing to argue that it should be legal for women to gestate fetuses for 9 months and then kill them for fun or profit. However, the solution to that highly unlikely problem must be careful not to limit the ability for the woman and her chosen medial professionals to decide to abort for legitimate medical concerns, and if we are to err one way or the other, we must err on the side of the woman's rights.

I'm not a conservatard. I don't vote based on single issues. I am not projecting, unlike kage, I do have deeply held beliefs that I only change when the preponderance of requires me to. I changed from a Republican to a Democrat, and have voted that way, because I became convinced that the democrats were trying to do more good than the republicans - who are only helping a narrow slice of Americans. I'm thinking of changing to an 'Independent'** just because I do not like the 'litmus test' of pro-abortion only that seems present in the democratic party. I don't pass that particular test. Climate change, universal healthcare, expansion of the social safety net with particular emphasis on the poor and working women (day care), etc., are all issues that deeply matter to me. Ya'll are judging me based on ONE particular issue - which is why I call it a litmus test. It's insanity that I cannot disagree with fellow democrats on one issue without being thrown to the wolves. I do not understand how it is that you cannot hear me. Or that none of you seems to know my posting history in P&N.

** Note, I didn't say 'Republican'. For crying out loud.

The litmus test here is whether or not someone accepts new information and adjusts to it or buries their head in the sand. FWIW, I hear you, even if these other wolves do not. I knew before I engaged you in this thread that you are a mostly rational person who comes down on the logical side of most issues, and who strives to help others.

The problem is when people ignore logic and evidence. I assume you get pissed off when you hear someone claim Trump cares about America or Trump is a genius. For us, opposition to choice is every bit as painful to see.

 

[kage69]

I worded that sentence badly. I meant no offense, you have my apologies.Sorry I pissed you off. I don’t think you are a magat, far from it. Didn’t know you were a Republican, it’s actually good to hear since that party is just wandering off into the deep end.

I'm done arguing about the abortion issue here on ATPN. I’m not good at it and it just causes allot of rancor. There is no need for more of that here.

I confess I did take offense to that, probably because I felt blindsided by a contributor whose posts I appreciate. Was unsure if you were referring to other subject, maybe a thread where I didn't see some posts. Apology definitely accepted, no worries Ajay. I'm going to make a concerted effort to be less gruff too. At least for the regulars.

 

[ivwshane]

Shane we're just never going to agree, let's just leave it at that.

I realize that which is why I came up with a compromise. Is the compromise not good enough for you? If not why?


In another post you said you were done talking about this subject because you aren’t good at it? I suspect what you meant is that you aren’t capable of defending your position. Do you think it’s reasonable to hold positions you can’t defend? If you can’t defend them does it make sense that you’d at least want to hear the arguments against your position so that you can at least understand the topic and then research it on your own and see if you can counter their arguments?

If you aren’t willing to challenge your beliefs then doesn’t that make you a “conservatard”? Is that how you and us should view you now?

Lastly, if you are unable to defend your position and you aren’t willing to listen to counter arguments then do you think you’ve earned the right to dictate to others what they are allowed to do with their own bodies?

The great thing about this country is that everyone can have their own beliefs. Problems only arise when those beliefs affect others so why are you so hell bent on forcing your beliefs on other people? You clearly wouldn’t accept the reverse, right?

You’ve got a lot of thinking to do but if you aren’t a “conservatard” I think you’ll be able to maintain your beliefs and it’s ok if you maintain them with out supporting facts or logic because what you believe doesn’t need to be justified...until you start forcing your beliefs on others.