Why do those on the left so vehemently defend abortion?

ao5884

Well-Known Member
Oct 1, 2019
7,180
6,984
1
Why are some on the right OK with one or more exceptions, such as rape, incest, or the life of the mother, while others are not OK with any exceptions?
Because we don't make policy on statistical outliers....we could be like California and make rape victims pay child support...would that be ok?
 

SLUPSU

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2018
4,438
2,537
1
Because we don't make policy on statistical outliers....we could be like California and make rape victims pay child support...would that be ok?

Several states are telling me that your fos.
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
20,614
23,776
1
It's Human from the moment life begins...it cannot be anything else.
I’m using human as human interaction , so I call it life , so we could say human life. Basically I agree with you but imo I’m playing their game, only better .
 

ao5884

Well-Known Member
Oct 1, 2019
7,180
6,984
1
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
20,614
23,776
1
It's Human from the moment life begins...it cannot be anything else.
The conservatives lose the abortion debate on emotion immediately with the “whatta bout rape” ridiculousness. It’s 80% of their schtick and unfortunately it works with many people .
I draw the distinction between life and human. You cannot argue that conception isn’t the start of life. Now I have them, any interruption from then on stops the life. So we’re between day one and app 20 weeks.
Now we move from that stupid viability argument. Then we need good research to prove human feelings , interaction , and actions . We can make a strong case for 12–15 weeks rather easily . You see I want less abortions , we get there by chipping away at their bait and switch arguments and educating people by being compassionate and understanding to those obvious horrible fallacies tossed at us,
 

SLUPSU

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2018
4,438
2,537
1

There you go again, off on a wild tangent. There are some states that preparing absolute abortion bans and some that aren't.

This is NOT about statistics.... how do you square the conservative states that aren't with this comment?

It's Human from the moment life begins...it cannot be anything else.
 

northwoods

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2001
7,531
1,734
1
They are much less "pro-abortion" as they are "pro-a women's choice" --- not the Federal Governments.
I think it is a tribal mentality. They don't think well for themselves and since the Party has made it part of the platform, they join in to be a part of the Party.

In time they convince themselves that this is what they believed all along, having been immersed within the rhetoric of their own side for so long that it programs them.

We can see it in other idiotic areas like CRT. There is no logical reason to believe in CRT except for the fact that some elite convinced vulnerable people that it was the truth.

It's sad but this is what our education system has produced, even at the highest levels of Ivy League liberalism. In the end they all look like lunatics.
Just curious --- would the need to say "the election was riggged" to be accepted as a real Republican these days not also be a great example of tribal mentality?
 

KnightWhoSaysNit

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2010
8,344
8,147
1
They are much less "pro-abortion" as they are "pro-a women's choice" --- not the Federal Governments.

Just curious --- would the need to say "the election was riggged" to be accepted as a real Republican these days not also be a great example of tribal mentality?

No. You would not.

I am a Republican and I don't believe the election was "rigged."

I believe there was a lot of cheating, such as ballot harvesting.

I believe the Dems want to change voting laws to make them less secure. Why would they want to do this? Why would they be against voter identification?

If Dems don't want their opposition to think elections are "rigged" then they should be doing everything possible to ensure the integrity of the vote. They refuse.
 

ao5884

Well-Known Member
Oct 1, 2019
7,180
6,984
1
There you go again, off on a wild tangent. There are some states that preparing absolute abortion bans and some that aren't.

This is NOT about statistics.... how do you square the conservative states that aren't with this comment?
The You should have worded your question a bit better. let's review. Below we see the text.

ao5884 said:
Because we don't make policy on statistical outliers....we could be like California and make rape victims pay child support...would that be ok?

Several states are telling me that your fos.

My post has 2 main elements

1. we don't make policy on statistical outlier

2.California and make rape victims pay child support.


You then make your classic vague statement.
not knowing which element or both elements (because you didn't specify), I provided sources that cover both.

Moving on

Statistical principles do not require someone or something to Be "With any comment" It's a generally accepted Practice. Ignorance regarding said principal is not exclusive to the left or right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

ao5884

Well-Known Member
Oct 1, 2019
7,180
6,984
1
Life starts at conception, viability is later . When the fetus is human as in it is feeling sensations and interacting with it’s environment isn’t determined exactly yet , but it’s prior to viability.
To put this into perspective. Charles Manson was allowed to live is life (all be it behind bars) But an innocent is expendable because that innocent is an inconvenience.......
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

psu skp

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Nov 7, 2016
7,362
14,793
1
50 yard line after dark
It's not simply defending abortion - it's allowing a person the freedom to make decisions about their own body. Why do you or others think you have the right to tell a woman what she has to do. There are freedoms and then there are dictators who love to demand someone else live according to their beleifs/religion.
No one is forcing anyone to have an abortion - simply a matter of freedom and respect
You are wrong, with all due respect. We are not allowed to do whatever we want in American society.

Suicide, for example, is "illegal" for a lot of very good reasons.

Child infanticide is illegal (no quotes this time) for a lot of very good reasons.

Torturing animals is illegal for a lot of very good reasons.

Killing old people who are ill is illegal for a lot of very good reasons.

And killing babies in the womb might soon be illegal in various U.S. States which revere life for a lot of very good reasons. God willing.
 

john4psu

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2003
11,081
7,459
1
If life ends when a heart stops beating, doesn't life begin when a heart starts beating?
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
20,614
23,776
1
No. You would not.

I am a Republican and I don't believe the election was "rigged."

I believe there was a lot of cheating, such as ballot harvesting.

I believe the Dems want to change voting laws to make them less secure. Why would they want to do this? Why would they be against voter identification?

If Dems don't want their opposition to think elections are "rigged" then they should be doing everything possible to ensure the integrity of the vote. They refuse.
Cheating enough to sun would be rigging it.
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
20,614
23,776
1
To put this into perspective. Charles Manson was allowed to live is life (all be it behind bars) But an innocent is expendable because that innocent is an inconvenience.......
I get that, but do you want to win? Too many people are irresponsible and emotional . They throw out the rape thing, spaz and we lose.
Now if we allow those exceptions then start to push back on convenience abortions we might start winning.
 

WPTLION

Well-Known Member
Jan 7, 2002
2,930
2,722
1
FYI Here is PA's Fetal Homicide Law--the state refers to the Fetus as an Unborn Child.....not sure how you can convicit someone of Fetal Homicide and then allow any abortion.

Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. tit. 18 § 106 and § 1102 et seq. define classes of offenses, including crimes against an unborn child and provide penalties. Section 1102 was amended in 2008 to provide for the sentence of the first degree murder and second degree murder of an unborn child (2008 HB 1845). Section 1102.1 was created in 2012 by Pa. Laws, Act 204 (SB 850) to provide for the sentence of a person under the age of 18 for certain offenses, including murder of an unborn child.
Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. tit. 18. § 2601 et seq. define crimes against an unborn child, including criminal homicide, murder, voluntary manslaughter, and aggravated assault of an unborn child. Unborn child is defined as in § 3203, to mean an individual organism of the species Homo sapiens from fertilization until live birth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

dontgojoepa

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2003
2,727
1,104
1
If life ends when a heart stops beating, doesn't life begin when a heart starts beating?
Your argument is essentially that because it has a heart beat, it’s a human life equally deserving of the same rights and sanctity given to human life outside the womb. While I get that point of view, the argument is ipse dixit. Basically true because you say it’s true or because the church or your beliefs tell you so. But it’s no stronger or weaker than the argument that because it’s not fully developed, or because it can’t think, or can’t breath or survive outside the womb, it’s not equivalent.

And that’s not to say that the fetus is not deserving of some level of sanctity. The question is to what extent. And many people’s opinions, morals, and beliefs have different answers to that question. Some think it’s never okay. Some think it’s okay to abort if the pregnancy was a result of rape or incest. Some think it’s okay to protect the mother’s life. Some think it’s okay so long as it is pre-viability. None are inherently more right or wrong. And while Christianity may teach it’s never okay, other religions don’t necessarily agree. Judaism permits abortion fairly broadly – so long as it is to protect the mother’s well-being – which includes her mental well-being. Many sects of Islam similarly permit it.

So, when someone is pro-choice, it’s not because they are in favor of abortion or have no concern for the sanctity of the fetus. It’s simply because they understand that this is a very complicated matter with no black and white answer, and no answer that fits every situation. And they believe, because of that complexity, it’s a decision that should be made carefully by the mother, the father, her doctor, her family – or whoever else she chooses to seek advice from. It should not be made by a few politicians – who are likely guided by their (or the majority of their constituent's) own religious beliefs on the issue (which in this country is likely Christianity), and who are likely men, whose bodies are not directly impacted by the decision.
 
Last edited:

MarkPSU

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
May 29, 2001
4,630
2,243
1
Abortion is an argument that can't be won by either side. In the end, you have to decide what's right for you. THAT BEING SAID............I think the science is fairly compelling. The moment the egg is fertilized, life begins. At around 13-16 weeks the fetus/baby begins to feel pain. I would recommend anyone watch a few videos of how abortions are performed at various stages of pregnancy to help formulate an opinion. If you have no problem with late term abortions, then we have different definitions of what it means to value innocent/helpless human life. Quite frankly, we place more emphasis on protecting animals/pets than we do babies. If we did to a kitten or puppy what we do during late term abortions people would be screaming from high heaven.......and they already do with respect to animals for research or food.
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
20,614
23,776
1
Abortion is an argument that can't be won by either side. In the end, you have to decide what's right for you. THAT BEING SAID............I think the science is fairly compelling. The moment the egg is fertilized, life begins. At around 13-16 weeks the fetus/baby begins to feel pain. I would recommend anyone watch a few videos of how abortions are performed at various stages of pregnancy to help formulate an opinion. If you have no problem with late term abortions, then we have different definitions of what it means to value innocent/helpless human life. Quite frankly, we place more emphasis on protecting animals/pets than we do babies. If we did to a kitten or puppy what we do during late term abortions people would be screaming from high heaven.......and they already do with respect to animals for research or food.
All very true, I compromise at exceptions for rape, incest, and the women’s life in danger . And the first trimester . This would reduce the overall amount and account for the exceptions that are constantly put out as an argument.
And I’m pro life ,
 
  • Like
Reactions: psuted and jjw165

LioninHouston

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 12, 2005
26,494
39,863
1
Pro-abortionists seem to be in a bit of a pickle here. Legally, it seems that an unborn child counts if the mother is killed, but not when she kills it. That just doesn’t make any sense. How can we argue that an unborn child only has a right to life if the mother wants the child or if the mother is murdered?
 

ao5884

Well-Known Member
Oct 1, 2019
7,180
6,984
1
I get that, but do you want to win? Too many people are irresponsible and emotional . They throw out the rape thing, spaz and we lose.
Now if we allow those exceptions then start to push back on convenience abortions we might start winning.
As a general rule I tend to see my values
Your argument is essentially that because it has a heart beat, it’s a human life equally deserving of the same rights and sanctity given to human life outside the womb. While I get that point of view, the argument is ipse dixit. Basically true because you say it’s true or because the church or your beliefs tell you so. But it’s no stronger or weaker than the argument that because it’s not fully developed, or because it can’t think, or can’t breath or survive outside the womb, it’s not equivalent.

And that’s not to say that the fetus is not deserving of some level of sanctity. The question is to what extent. And many people’s opinions, morals, and beliefs have different answers to that question. Some think it’s never okay. Some think it’s okay to abort if the pregnancy was a result of rape or incest. Some think it’s okay to protect the mother’s life. Some think it’s okay so long as it is pre-viability. None are inherently more right or wrong. And while Christianity may teach it’s never okay, other religions don’t necessarily agree. Judaism permits abortion fairly broadly – so long as it is to protect the mother’s well-being – which includes her mental well-being. Many sects of Islam similarly permit it.

So, when someone is pro-choice, it’s not because they are in favor of abortion or have no concern for the sanctity of the fetus. It’s simply because they understand that this is a very complicated matter with no black and white answer, and no answer that fits every situation. And they believe, because of that complexity, it’s a decision that should be made carefully by the mother, the father, her doctor, her family – or whoever else she chooses to seek advice from. It should not be made by a few politicians – who are likely guided by their (or the majority of their constituent's) own religious beliefs on the issue (which in this country is likely Christianity), and who are likely men, whose bodies are not directly impacted by the decision.
It's not complicated and it has nothing to do with church. It is a Human life. Why?
1. Because life begins at fertilization.


2. It cannot be anything other than Human.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

dontgojoepa

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2003
2,727
1,104
1
As a general rule I tend to see my values
It's not complicated and it has nothing to do with church. It is a Human life. Why?
1. Because life begins at fertilization.


2. It cannot be anything other than Human.
Your argument is no different than the one I addressed in my prior post. I don't take issue with either of your conclusions. And it is not those conclusions that are complicated. You are using those conclusions to support your belief that that embryo or life deserves the same exact level of sanctity and rights as a living and breathing human being after they have left the womb. There's also nothing wrong with that belief. But that is where the complication lies and where many people and religions differ.
 

LafayetteBear

Well-Known Member
Dec 1, 2009
47,087
20,918
1
All very true, I compromise at exceptions for rape, incest, and the women’s life in danger . And the first trimester . This would reduce the overall amount and account for the exceptions that are constantly put out as an argument.
And I’m pro life ,
Why didn't you just say so at the outset? That would have saved a lot of needless argument. The position you articulated above is not far off from the compromise position that Roe v. Wade attempted to stake out.