Ben Carson has one of the best arguments RE abortion...

[republicanchick]

Ben Carson makes a good point in his book RE abortion and the woman having all rights to do as she chooses, the child having NONE.

I am paraphrasing what he said but soemthing to the effect that just b/c the baby lives in her womb, thereby conferring on her a form of "ownership"-- for lack of a better word-- that does not mean she has all power over that child's life

(This is said to those who do not honor LIFE itself... or put LIFE after some other rght in their hierarchy of values, eg: "choice," [the woman's choice, of course])

Carson says that just owning a dog does not give you the right to torture and kill it

(how much more so a human being created in God's image)



"Whatever you do to the least of My brethren, you do unto Me"




Jesus said





+

 

[The Horn]

But it's just fine and dandy if the child she bears is born into abject poverty, hunger,malnutrition , poor, unsanitary housing , leck of medical care and good education ? This is why women have abortions .
Right to life ? What about the right to decent food, shelter, medical care and education ? And what about the rights of babies who grow up to be gay ? If you're opposed to abortion but want babies who grow up to be gay to be denied rights, you are a hypocrite of the worst kind .

 

[quip]

I suppose if you squint real hard....the one on the right looks like a dog. :chuckle:

(how many dog embryos you own?)

 

[republicanchick]

But it's just fine and dandy if the child she bears is born into abject poverty, hunger,malnutrition , poor, unsanitary housing , leck of medical care and good education ? This is why women have abortions .
Right to life ? What about the right to decent food, shelter, medical care and education ? And what about the rights of babies who grow up to be gay ? If you're opposed to abortion but want babies who grow up to be gay to be denied rights, you are a hypocrite of the worst kind .

get real. You don't resort to murder to avoid someone possibly having a "hard" life..

but then i guess u dont have a problem with murder...

CREEPY!



___

 

[republicanchick]

I suppose if you squint real hard....the one on the right looks like a dog. :chuckle:

(how many dog embryos you own?)

did Buddha believe in murdering unborn humans?



___

 

[Rusha]

But it's just fine and dandy if the child she bears is born into abject poverty, hunger,malnutrition , poor, unsanitary housing , leck of medical care and good education ? This is why women have abortions ..

No it's not. I have pointed that out to you before. Women are NOT required to keep their newborns. There are a variety of excuses women use as to why they have abortions.

Your argument would indicate that you only believe abortions should happen if a woman is poor.

Right to life ? What about the right to decent food, shelter, medical care and education ? And what about the rights of babies who grow up to be gay ? If you're opposed to abortion but want babies who grow up to be gay to be denied rights, you are a hypocrite of the worst kind .

I am only interested in unborn babies being given a CHANCE to have a life, just like their parents did. You are only interested in allowing women to snuff out the lives of their unborn babies on the altar of convenience.

IF you truly cared about women and children, you would focus your energy on their well being rather than fighting for their right to kill.

 

[The Berean]

But it's just fine and dandy if the child she bears is born into abject poverty, hunger,malnutrition , poor, unsanitary housing , leck of medical care and good education ? This is why women have abortions .
Right to life ? What about the right to decent food, shelter, medical care and education ? And what about the rights of babies who grow up to be gay ? If you're opposed to abortion but want babies who grow up to be gay to be denied rights, you are a hypocrite of the worst kind .

So your answer is to kill the baby instead? Your support of murder is duly noted.

 

[republicanchick]

yeh, for sure


Lots of folks wandering over.. from Moron City...


+++

 

[The Berean]

No it's not. I have pointed that out to you before. Women are NOT required to keep their newborns. There are a variety of excuses women use as to why they have abortions.

Your argument would indicate that you only believe abortions should happen if a woman is poor.



I am only interested in unborn babies being given a CHANCE to have a life, just like their parents did. You are only interested in allowing women to snuff out the lives of their unborn babies on the altar of convenience.

IF you truly cared about women and children, you would focus your energy on their well being rather than fighting for their right to kill.

My wife and I never had any children though we tried for years. If there was a young teen girl that we knew who couldn't raise her baby we would gladly adopt the baby and give the child a loving home.

 

[The Horn]

It's not a question of "possibly " living a hard life . If these women who had abortions had given birth , their children woudl definitely had grown up in hotrrible conditions . We already have too many of these in in America, and we don't need more .
It's not that pro-choice people like me "like" abortion and want abortions to happen . We don't !We're just reaistic enough to realize that abortion is inevitable, and while tragic, not something which can ever be ended . We would rather PREVENT as many abortions as possible by making sure that people always have easy access to contraceptives and that children who ARE born will not be denied the basic necessities of life .

 

[gcthomas]

I think that the OP reference to dogs is misplaced. If you own a dog then you do, indeed, have the right to have that dog destroyed. What conclusion should I take from the dog analogy, when dogs are owned as property?

 

[Rusha]

My wife and I never had any children though we tried for years. If there was a young teen girl that we knew who couldn't raise her baby we would gladly adopt the baby and give the child a loving home.

:thumb: That would be one lucky child.

 

[The Berean]

:thumb: That would be one lucky child.

Thank you Rusha. My wife has an amazing mothering instinct. She never had any children of her own but she loves children and bonds with them easily. In her early 20's she was a nanny and helped a family raise two young girls. She has this ability to take any crying baby and get them to stop crying in under 30 seconds. My brother lives nearby and my wife helps our sister-in-law with their three children (4, 2, 9 months). Their oldest is autistic so he has special needs. Sometimes my wife would go over to their house, see her sister-in-law stressed out, and orders her to go to her bedroom and take a nap for two hours. My wife will then take care of the three children. The youngest child, a nine month old boy, simply adores his auntie. Every time he sees her he wants to jump out of his walker. If he's on the ground he'll immediately crawl towards her. She's really amazing.

 

[Rusha]

It's not a question of "possibly " living a hard life . If these women who had abortions had given birth , their children woudl definitely had grown up in hotrrible conditions . We already have too many of these in in America, and we don't need more .

So intentionally killing an unborn child is preferable to ADOPTION? Only on planet "ME.ME.ME".

It's not that pro-choice people like me "like" abortion and want abortions to happen . We don't !

Sure you do. You use every opportunity to encourage and justify abortion and bash prolifers and anti-abortion advocates.

We're just reaistic enough to realize that abortion is inevitable, and while tragic,

Why do you refer to a medically unnecessary procedure as tragic? Tragic indicates something that is horrible and shouldn't happen, yet you support ALL decisions to abort 100 percent.

not something which can ever be ended . We would rather PREVENT as many abortions as possible by making sure that people always have easy access to contraceptives and that children who ARE born will not be denied the basic necessities of life .

You forgot about children never being on the other end of school shootings. Traffic accidents. Cancer. Etc...

You are making an assumption that children NEED to starve or go without medical care. Do you really think there are not just as many women and men who have raised their children on their own even though they had to scrape and sweat and even ask for assistance at some point?

My father raised my two brothers from the age of six months and 2 years old as a single parent until he met my mother. My half brother contracted Spinal Meningitis as a baby and my father was told he would probably never walk or communicate. My dad painstakingly worked with my brother and the outcome was that my brother could walk, communicate, drive a vehicle, work, live on his own, etc.

The point is ... children do not need a parent who is rich or has moderate income. They need a parent who is selfless enough to love them even if that means allowing someone else to give them the life they are not capable of supplying.

You are putting the value of the almighty dollar above the lives of children.

 

[HisServant]

But it's just fine and dandy if the child she bears is born into abject poverty, hunger,malnutrition , poor, unsanitary housing , leck of medical care and good education ? This is why women have abortions .
Right to life ? What about the right to decent food, shelter, medical care and education ? And what about the rights of babies who grow up to be gay ? If you're opposed to abortion but want babies who grow up to be gay to be denied rights, you are a hypocrite of the worst kind .

Look at the root of the problem... deal with it and then the problem of abortions will go away.

Keep your clothes on if you cannot afford and are unwilling to raise what might just happen during your short romp of bad judgement. If you need to have an abortion (except in the obvious case of the mothers health)... there should be a serious discussion around sterilization at the same time. Why should we allow you to reproduce if your offspring are dependent on the good will of the tax payers?

The problem is SEX and lack of self discipline... not the fetus.

But then again these days we seem to think anything and everything is permissible as long as it feels good.

 

[Town Heretic]

But it's just fine and dandy if the child she bears is born into abject poverty, hunger,malnutrition , poor, unsanitary housing , leck of medical care and good education ? This is why women have abortions .

Sometimes that's their reasoning. Often it isn't. Only 38% cited economic hardship in a 2004 survey noted in a study by the Guttmacher Institute of New York.

A more recent study by the University of California, San Francisco, found the following answers:

Researchers found 40% of these women mentioning something financial, 36% in some way discussing the bad “timing” of the pregnancy, 31% raising a partner issue, 29% speaking of “other children,” 20% talking of the child somehow interfering with future opportunities.​

The study was published in the July 5, 2013, edition of BMC Women’s Health and is available online under Understanding why women seek abortions in the U.S.

Right to life ? What about the right to decent food, shelter, medical care and education ?

Why are any of those in competition?

And what about the rights of babies who grow up to be gay ?

We'll never know unless they're allowed to be born into the world, will we?

If you're opposed to abortion but want babies who grow up to be gay to be denied rights, you are a hypocrite of the worst kind .

That's irrational. You can believe that everyone is entitled to life without approving of how anyone lives it.

 

[gcthomas]

Look at the root of the problem...

The problem is SEX and lack of self discipline... not the fetus.

The problem is alternatively poor training in, or availability of, reliable contraceptives. Self discipline, especially when imposed by others, is not the unique problem here.

 

[PureX]

Carson says that just owning a dog does not give you the right to torture and kill it

It's an inept analogy. A baby is a parasite, feeding off the mother's body as it develops. A dog is not. A baby cannot survive apart from the mother's body prior to the 24th week of development (the cut-off point for a legal abortion). A dog can. Babies are not dogs, and so do not equate to dogs legally, morally, or logically.

 

[HisServant]

The problem is alternatively poor training in, or availability of, reliable contraceptives. Self discipline, especially when imposed by others, is not the unique problem here.

You can train people all they want... but if the character of self discipline is not developed, it is for naught.

 

[gcthomas]

You can train people all they want... but if the character of self discipline is not developed, it is for naught.

The abortion rate has dropped by half ofer the last 35 years: how much of that is through easy availability of contraceptives and improved education in their use?

Would you want reduced contraceptive use now?