The meaning of Pro-Choice ?

[HadToRegister]

 

 

 

Of course it is alive ... I think what you mean is it does not possess a birth certificate yet.

 

Therefore a legal viable human life that the laws of our country would protect.

 

Immigration and abortion should be fused together so as to never be able to talk about one without the other. Then the glaring contradictions from both sides could become clear as mud.

 

 

 

If it's alive, than it can exist outside of its host on its own, yes?

 

Take a biology class

 

What part of Pro-CHOICE don't you "Pro-Life" people get?

 

Just because abortion is legal doesn't mean they're MANDATORY.

 

Why do you people hate CHOICE so much?

 

What about these hypocritical Right-Wing Congressmen who are "Pro-Life" but get caught getting abortions for their mistresses?

They don't believe any of that "Pro-Life" stuff, they just regurgitate that crap to get people to vote for them.

 

Besides, it's none of your damned business what other people do, but People always on the Right, want to tell people what they can do in their own bedrooms with another adult, who they can marry, and who has to have babies.

 

MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS IT DOESN'T CONCERN YOU.

 

 

 

Using politicians as examples of 'morality' is really a non-starter. We already know that none of them are honest, and they all lie, cheat, and steal, to further their own ends. What really boggles the mind is, yes, we KNOW they are all crooks, in one form or another, but we continue to vote them back into office?????? Really???? WTH????

 

The jury is still out on when "life" begins...... and the definitions thereof, are at best, murky. Some believe that life begins at conception, others when there is a detectable heartbeat, and even those that believe that it is when they take their first breath..... And that whole 'survive on their own' thing? Well, once could argue that a great many species produce young that CANNOT 'survive on their own' for quite some time after birth. (like, most mammals......)

 

In all reality, I simply wish the government would NOT try and legislate the way I live my life. Both parties are doing it, and neither party can claim the moral high ground. Because neither one of them are anything remotely resembling 'moral'.

 

 

 

Ah, the old "Both Sides" nonsense.

I used to use that argument when I watched Fox News back in the day, I did it to seem like I was "Fair"

 

The Right just tried to slam through an anti-abortion bill that they stripped of the Rape and incest clause, and they did it, by quickly announcing it, and not letting anybody vote on it, and passed it.

It didn't get tabled until everybody complained about it, but the Right has NO intention of having a two-party system, as we see every day now in the news.

 

Point is, it's nobody's business who does what.

Right-Wing Talibangelicals want to dictate what everybody does based on their religion, and they need to STFU or start paying taxes, they also need to GTFO of our Government and Schools

Most of them are the biggest hypocrites anyway.

 

Bristol Palin is a shining example.

Toured around the US with her "Abstinence Program", while having kids with two different fathers out of wedlock.

 

I don't even need to talk about Josh Duggar...

 

So yea, these Talibangelicals want everybody to live up to the standards they set for everybody else, while acting like the same rules don't apply to them.

 

Maybe they should take some advice from their own text that they pretend to read

[HeyYou]

 

 

 

 

Of course it is alive ... I think what you mean is it does not possess a birth certificate yet.

 

Therefore a legal viable human life that the laws of our country would protect.

 

Immigration and abortion should be fused together so as to never be able to talk about one without the other. Then the glaring contradictions from both sides could become clear as mud.

 

 

 

If it's alive, than it can exist outside of its host on its own, yes?

 

Take a biology class

 

What part of Pro-CHOICE don't you "Pro-Life" people get?

 

Just because abortion is legal doesn't mean they're MANDATORY.

 

Why do you people hate CHOICE so much?

 

What about these hypocritical Right-Wing Congressmen who are "Pro-Life" but get caught getting abortions for their mistresses?

They don't believe any of that "Pro-Life" stuff, they just regurgitate that crap to get people to vote for them.

 

Besides, it's none of your damned business what other people do, but People always on the Right, want to tell people what they can do in their own bedrooms with another adult, who they can marry, and who has to have babies.

 

MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS IT DOESN'T CONCERN YOU.

 

 

 

Using politicians as examples of 'morality' is really a non-starter. We already know that none of them are honest, and they all lie, cheat, and steal, to further their own ends. What really boggles the mind is, yes, we KNOW they are all crooks, in one form or another, but we continue to vote them back into office?????? Really???? WTH????

 

The jury is still out on when "life" begins...... and the definitions thereof, are at best, murky. Some believe that life begins at conception, others when there is a detectable heartbeat, and even those that believe that it is when they take their first breath..... And that whole 'survive on their own' thing? Well, once could argue that a great many species produce young that CANNOT 'survive on their own' for quite some time after birth. (like, most mammals......)

 

In all reality, I simply wish the government would NOT try and legislate the way I live my life. Both parties are doing it, and neither party can claim the moral high ground. Because neither one of them are anything remotely resembling 'moral'.

 

 

 

Ah, the old "Both Sides" nonsense.

I used to use that argument when I watched Fox News back in the day, I did it to seem like I was "Fair"

 

The Right just tried to slam through an anti-abortion bill that they stripped of the Rape and incest clause, and they did it, by quickly announcing it, and not letting anybody vote on it, and passed it.

It didn't get tabled until everybody complained about it, but the Right has NO intention of having a two-party system, as we see every day now in the news.

 

Point is, it's nobody's business who does what.

Right-Wing Talibangelicals want to dictate what everybody does based on their religion, and they need to STFU or start paying taxes, they also need to GTFO of our Government and Schools

Most of them are the biggest hypocrites anyway.

 

Bristol Palin is a shining example.

Toured around the US with her "Abstinence Program", while having kids with two different fathers out of wedlock.

 

I don't even need to talk about Josh Duggar...

 

So yea, these Talibangelicals want everybody to live up to the standards they set for everybody else, while acting like the same rules don't apply to them.

 

Maybe they should take some advice from their own text that they pretend to read

 

Nonsense? So, you believe that everything the dems are doing are 'in the best interests of the people'? Terribly sorry, that simply is not the case. Neither party has the best interests of americans as a whole at heart, all they want is what is best for THEM, be it better benefits, higher pay, bigger bribes, larger kickbacks from their political supporters, or simply a giant game of oneupmanship against their political rivals. They all have their own pet 'religion', for the dems, is AGW, for the repubbies, its their religious beliefs. Neither side has the higher ground.

 

So far as I am concerned, there is no lower form of life than a politician. They are the bottom feeders of society, and are generally the SOURCE of most of societies problems. What party they come from just doesn't matter.

[Mktavish]

 

 

Of course it is alive ... I think what you mean is it does not possess a birth certificate yet.

 

Therefore a legal viable human life that the laws of our country would protect.

 

Immigration and abortion should be fused together so as to never be able to talk about one without the other. Then the glaring contradictions from both sides could become clear as mud.

 

 

 

If it's alive, than it can exist outside of its host on its own, yes?

 

Take a biology class

 

What part of Pro-CHOICE don't you "Pro-Life" people get?

 

Just because abortion is legal doesn't mean they're MANDATORY.

 

Why do you people hate CHOICE so much?

 

What about these hypocritical Right-Wing Congressmen who are "Pro-Life" but get caught getting abortions for their mistresses?

They don't believe any of that "Pro-Life" stuff, they just regurgitate that crap to get people to vote for them.

 

Besides, it's none of your damned business what other people do, but People always on the Right, want to tell people what they can do in their own bedrooms with another adult, who they can marry, and who has to have babies.

 

MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS IT DOESN'T CONCERN YOU.

 

 

 

 

Do you have that short of a memory ? What gave you the impression I am solidly on the side of pro-life vs pro-choice ? And I specifically brought this up in reference to the point of the birthing process. Ergo not even talking about trimester stages.

But yes I believe the baby , is something alive , but part of the mothers body , therefore under her discretion of decision over anybody elses. Up to the point there is no impact upon her body that her previous decisions to keep carrying hasn't already done.

 

Or simply saying , the right of choice by the mother over the babies life ends when there is no further impact to her body by the live birth of it. Anybody still has choice of parent hood , and how much money and time they will invest in a child.

So there is no reason for a pro-choice position to insert it's self past pregnancy ... imo anyways. If one wishes to not bear the responsibility of parenthood ... you can simply leave the now legal citizen with birth certificate , in the hands of pro-life people to take care of.

 

Right ? :whistling:

[HadToRegister]

 

 

 

 

Do you have that short of a memory ? What gave you the impression I am solidly on the side of pro-life vs pro-choice ? And I specifically brought this up in reference to the point of the birthing process. Ergo not even talking about trimester stages.

But yes I believe the baby , is something alive , but part of the mothers body , therefore under her discretion of decision over anybody elses. Up to the point there is no impact upon her body that her previous decisions to keep carrying hasn't already done.

 

Or simply saying , the right of choice by the mother over the babies life ends when there is no further impact to her body by the live birth of it. Anybody still has choice of parent hood , and how much money and time they will invest in a child.

So there is no reason for a pro-choice position to insert it's self past pregnancy ... imo anyways. If one wishes to not bear the responsibility of parenthood ... you can simply leave the now legal citizen with birth certificate , in the hands of pro-life people to take care of.

 

Right ? :whistling:

 

 

Ah, the tired old "Adoption" Argument.

 

What about the 400,000 children already in Foster care that these "Pro-Life" stooges care so much about?

 

Why haven't they adopted all of them yet?

 

What about the person who was raped who does not want to bring the child to term?

What about the incest victim who doesn't want to either?

 

Pro-Lifers always have "easy solutions", that are only easy to them, in their mind.

 

How about a better solution, since Men can get hundreds of women pregnant every year, and a woman can only get pregnant roughly every 40 weeks, lets address the actual problem, and solve it by Mandatory Vasectomies at the onset of puberty

 

Sine they;'re reversible, the man, once married and that wants to have children can drive to an inconveniently located clinic a few hours away where he can get his vasectomy reversed until his wife becomes pregnant.

Upon his wife being pregnant, he then has to drive a few hours to the inconveniently located clinic and get his reversed vasectomy re-reversed.

 

That sounds like a better plan, it'd stop all of these irresponsible men from running around and pollinating everything they see.

 

Surely that's not harsh, I mean a few states want to jail women for up to 99 years for getting an abortion in another state

 

This isn't about birth control, this is the Talibaneligcals wanting to control women through Christian Sharia Law.

 

 

 

[Mktavish]

 

So far as I am concerned, there is no lower form of life than a politician. They are the bottom feeders of society, and are generally the SOURCE of most of societies problems. What party they come from just doesn't matter.

 

 

I think this subject may need it's own debate topic ... but lets go ahead and explore this sentiment and options to alleviate it. Which I'll start with saying ...

 

Politicians are something invented by necessity ... so that we could have democracy with out all the tediousness it would take for a government truly run by every bodies vote on every issue. But now with our level of technology ... that tediousness is no longer a problem needing representatives. So basically we could just replace them all with AI to tally votes and implement governmental orders to people that make up the dutiful functioning parts of our government.

 

Or do we still need people to save us from the mob rule mentality that might arise from counting every common mans vote ?

[Mktavish]

 

 

 

 

 

Do you have that short of a memory ? What gave you the impression I am solidly on the side of pro-life vs pro-choice ? And I specifically brought this up in reference to the point of the birthing process. Ergo not even talking about trimester stages.

But yes I believe the baby , is something alive , but part of the mothers body , therefore under her discretion of decision over anybody elses. Up to the point there is no impact upon her body that her previous decisions to keep carrying hasn't already done.

 

Or simply saying , the right of choice by the mother over the babies life ends when there is no further impact to her body by the live birth of it. Anybody still has choice of parent hood , and how much money and time they will invest in a child.

So there is no reason for a pro-choice position to insert it's self past pregnancy ... imo anyways. If one wishes to not bear the responsibility of parenthood ... you can simply leave the now legal citizen with birth certificate , in the hands of pro-life people to take care of.

 

Right ? :whistling:

 

 

Ah, the tired old "Adoption" Argument.

 

What about the 400,000 children already in Foster care that these "Pro-Life" stooges care so much about?

 

Why haven't they adopted all of them yet?

 

What about the person who was raped who does not want to bring the child to term?

What about the incest victim who doesn't want to either?

 

Pro-Lifers always have "easy solutions", that are only easy to them, in their mind.

 

How about a better solution, since Men can get hundreds of women pregnant every year, and a woman can only get pregnant roughly every 40 weeks, lets address the actual problem, and solve it by Mandatory Vasectomies at the onset of puberty

 

Sine they;'re reversible, the man, once married and that wants to have children can drive to an inconveniently located clinic a few hours away where he can get his vasectomy reversed until his wife becomes pregnant.

Upon his wife being pregnant, he then has to drive a few hours to the inconveniently located clinic and get his reversed vasectomy re-reversed.

 

That sounds like a better plan, it'd stop all of these irresponsible men from running around and pollinating everything they see.

 

Surely that's not harsh, I mean a few states want to jail women for up to 99 years for getting an abortion in another state

 

This isn't about birth control, this is the Talibaneligcals wanting to control women through Christian Sharia Law.

 

 

 

 

 

Even though what I said might have inferred adoption ... I am not talking about that.

Because that involves another choice beyond the mothers.

And I thought I have been pretty explicit and clear ... this is about when the birth process has started. To then still consider abortion.

Because there is no viable position of choice by the mother , about her body , to then decide a life need be extinguished. If she was raped ... why didn't she abort a long time ago ? Since you brought up that old tired argument in this context.

 

I'm simply saying it is a bridge to far ... to be on the right side of it. Which I am firmly on Pro-choice ground here. And I want to keep the higher ground of morality here. Which IMHO , steps off of that moral high ground by saying you can legally abort after labor has begun.

I think there is further problems aborting in the 3rd trimester ... but that is a big grey area I choose not to delve into. And just to add another caveat about the number 3.

I think a 3rd abortion should be the last time to choose it. Meaning now the woman should be sterilized. But I know that's probably to controversial. As is your point about regulation of the male side of the equation. In which I have often thought in rebuttal to a pro-life position saying the point of conception is the line to be drawn. Needs to then consider backwards beyond that ... that sperm should also be regulated. So as not to give women the undue burden that they have had to live with for so long. Hence the start of pro-choice to begin with.

 

I think you are starting to dabble in population control there with your last post.

And I think that is a subject worth bringing up . But pro-choice does itself no favors wrapping that in and masking it as a womans right to choose.

[Deleted67195711User]

Hyperbole and misinformation.

 

What Mktavish is talking about is called "Dilate and extract". The term "partial birth abortion" is deliberately misleading and is meant to inflame the passions of those who choose emotion over intellect and belief over fact.

 

Dilate and extract (D&E) is used to remove unwanted tissue from the uterus. It's PRIMARY purpose is to remove dead fetuses and placental material before they infect the mother.

 

The procedure has come under fire in the last decade because it has become used to abort unwanted pregnancies.

 

So some facts are in order.

• The majority of late term D&E procedures occur in states other than the woman's state of residence.
• Late term D&E procedures tend to occur in states bordering other states which require parental consent for early term abortions.
• Late term D&E procedures tend to occur in states bordering other states which require psychological consoling before receiving an early term abortion.
• Late term D&E procedures tend to occur in states bordering other states which punish medical practitioners for performing early term abortions.
• Late term D&E procedures tend to occur in states bordering other states which allow religious proselytizers to set up fake abortion clinics to mislead and misinform unsuspecting women.
• Late term D&E procedures tend to occur in states bordering other states which restrict clinics from recommending early term abortions.
• Late term D&E procedures tend to occur in states bordering other states which require clinics which perform early term abortions to be located within a specific distance of an emergency hospital.
• Late term D&E procedures tend to occur in states bordering other states which require a medical doctor be present during an early term abortion.
• Late term D&E procedures tend to occur in states bordering other states which require unnecessary medical exams and imaging before receiving an early term abortion.

There are some facts. These facts seem to indicate that most late term D&E procedures occur because states meddle with women's right to a LEGAL medical procedure and women are traveling to other states for that legal medical procedure later in their pregnancies.

 

Maybe the real solution to stopping late term D&E procedures is to start giving women their legal medical procedure and get rid of all the theological and political interference.

 

Yeah, I know. Getting back to "abortion is legal, and shouldn't be restricted" would interfere with the efforts by some to legislate their morality for everyone.

[Mktavish]

I don't believe you are not hyperboling ... which you can not help the subject AT ALL ... if y0u do.

[Deleted21550714User]

my problem with abortion in 2019 is the narrative. it seems like you're either for no abortion or your fine with 600,000+ abortions a year(USA)

It seems like there is no room for compromise. Whatever happened to Bill Clintons "abortions should be safe,legal, and rare" The conservatives can't accept the legal part on account mostly because of their religious beliefs, which is odd cause i believe the bible instructs Christians to follower the rule of law. Might be wrong on last part, i'm not a Christian. the dems can't handle the rare part because they only see that happening through legislation, meanwhile 600,000+ women go through the process of deciding to take the life of their offspring and I hate that for women. there something, i think it goes "ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" we need to a break from fight over whether or not abortion should remain legal and at least partially focus on preventing some of these unwanted pregnancies from occurring.

[HeyYou]

my problem with abortion in 2019 is the narrative. it seems like you're either for no abortion or your fine with 600,000+ abortions a year(USA)

It seems like there is no room for compromise. Whatever happened to Bill Clintons "abortions should be safe,legal, and rare" The conservatives can't accept the legal part on account mostly because of their religious beliefs, which is odd cause i believe the bible instructs Christians to follower the rule of law. Might be wrong on last part, i'm not a Christian. the dems can't handle the rare part because they only see that happening through legislation, meanwhile 600,000+ women go through the process of deciding to take the life of their offspring and I hate that for women. there something, i think it goes "ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" we need to a break from fight over whether or not abortion should remain legal and at least partially focus on preventing some of these unwanted pregnancies from occurring.

Folks have been working on preventing 'unwanted pregnancies' as long as I can remember, in all reality, likely far longer...... And we still see pretty much a consistent number of abortions per year. From that bit of information, I can draw the conclusion that what we are doing, and have been doing for generations, ISN'T WORKING. Teaching abstinence as the ONLY thing in whatever sex education classes you get in school is just stupid. It OBVIOUSLY doesn't work, but, we can do something different? Apparently not..... And that one, I lay right at the feet of the religious right. And given THAT bit of information, I don't see anything changing any time soon.