Abortion...So here's your thread

[t316]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
I would leave it to the starter of the thread to ask that...

As starter of the thread...it looks like you guys will decide when it gets locked, if the personal attacks get out of control. I stated my position way back on pg. 2 or 3 (forgot now). I have been following each post, learning a lot of perspectives, but my position is unchanged. The only "unreasonable" attacks that I have seen so far, which I don't think warrant locking the thread up, are the few stabs at "Bible thumpers". I don't see where any pro-life posts on here have tried to shove religion in anyone's face. Some of the stats have come from religious sources, but facts are facts. It just seems that everytime a moral issue is not going someone's way, they just throw up the "must be a Bible thumper" card. Lame IMO

 

[jtrzerocool]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
.
developing ...do i need to look up the definition of developing as well?

 

[clown boy]

Yeah of course he's developing. Two year olds are still developing.

 

[jtrzerocool]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
Yeah of course he's developing. Two year olds are still developing.
no...by 2 years old he is growing and learning...still in the womb he is developing lungs and such...

 

[darknes]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
Keep the government out of MY business. Hey, why stop at abortion? Let's completely ban the ownership of guns and not allow ANY smoking -- cigars, pipes, or cigarettes. Those two kill more people than abortion. Don't see you getting on the crusade to stop those practices.
I could care less if you decide to smoke or drink alone until you kill yourself; you do what you want with your body. It's when you put other's lives at risk when the government should step in. That's why drinking and driving is illegal, and many cities and companies are banning smoking in public places. As far as guns, if you shoot someone, you are held accountable.
I could care less what a woman does to her body up until the point where she harms another person.
It's YOUR business until you harm another person.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
LOL... ok.. I'm sure 400,000 gun deaths go unreported every year...
How do gun deaths go unreported, the moment the morgue or mortuary sees a bullet, oh, legally required to do an autopsy. It isn't a natural death. How are you going to hide that? Burry someone in your backyard in the middle of the night?

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by jtrzerocool
..... a developing human from usually two months after conception to birth[/B]
As Clownboy pointed out your own definition quoted defies your argument.
Is a fetus a human? Yes or no? is a premature child born somehow less human? What is it about "birth" that suddenly makes a fetus a child in your mind?
The "Proc Choice" argument is trying to make up definitions and ignore science (ironically the same things "Bible thumpers" are often ridiculed for by the same folks...)
I stand 100% by my original question; When does life begin?

 

[rudedog40]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
Well, for one, where I said that when a pregnant woman is killed, the murderer is charged with two murders. Therefore, two persons. Need more?

The two murders scenario only occurs when they know the baby is past the abortion stage. If a woman is murdered who happens to be only 6 weeks pregnant, I doubt they would have grounds for double homicide. Unless of course the judge is some pro choice fanatic...

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by jonthefishguy
wow, egg in face....
Not if you read the definition carefully...
Speaking of, found any statistics to back up your claim that hundeds of thousands of gun deaths go unreported in this country every year?

 

[rudedog40]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
You need to check your numbers again....
Recent statistics on gun deaths in the USA: approx 40,000
CDC numbers for smoking deaths in 2006: approx 400,000
Legal abortions reported to the CDC in the USA in 2004: 840,000....

Only 840,000? Come on pregnant women who don't want those babies! Let's break the 1,000,000 mark for Jerry's Kids!!!

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
The two murders scenario only occurs when they know the baby is past the abortion stage. If a woman is murdered who happens to be only 6 weeks pregnant, I doubt they would have grounds for double homicide. Unless of course the judge is some pro choice fanatic...
Again, wrong.
"The highest criminal court in Texas has held that killing a fetus before viability can be prosecuted as murder.
The court ruled in the case of Terence Lawrence, convicted of double murder for shooting and killing his girlfriend, who had been pregnant for six weeks or less, the Austin American-Statesman reports." Dated Nov 26, 2007

 

[jtrzerocool]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
Again, wrong.
"The highest criminal court in Texas has held that killing a fetus before viability can be prosecuted as murder.
The court ruled in the case of Terence Lawrence, convicted of double murder for shooting and killing his girlfriend, who had been pregnant for six weeks or less, the Austin American-Statesman reports." Dated Nov 26, 2007
but this isnt in every state...

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
Only 840,000? Come on pregnant women who don't want those babies! Let's break the 1,000,000 mark for Jerry's Kids!!!
See? Keep debating with me and you can learn things.
As I've stated, those are the most conservative numbers for abortions I know of. Many estimates put it well above 1 million per year.

 

[rudedog40]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
No, I don't think that I child should be able to tell it's mother what to do. But when it comes to life and death, the line is drawn.

So Clown Boy. Let's say your wife is at home alone, and some lowlife breaks into the house and rapes her. Couple weeks later, you find out she's pregnant. What do you do? Do you continue with the pregnancy and raise the child yourself, looking at it knowing it was conceived by some scum bag, or do you give it up for adoption, knowing that a child born by your wife is out in the world. Remember, abortion is out of the question.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by jtrzerocool
but this isnt in every state...
rudedog didn't make any mention of "every state".
The federal "Right to Life" bill passed in 2004 states: "recognizes as a legal victim any "child in utero" who is injured or killed during the commission of a federal crime of violence. The bill defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb. The law lists the 68 existing federal crimes to which the bill would apply, each of which already covers the pregnant woman. These laws cover federal jurisdictions (such as federal lands, tribal lands, and the military system) and federal officials. They also cover various types of criminal conduct that Congress has decided should be federal crimes wherever they occur, including interstate stalking, kidnapping, certain drug offenses, bombings, and many others.
From now on, if a person harms a pregnant woman while violating one of the existing statutes listed in the bill, he will be charged under the previous laws for her injury or death, but also will face a second charge for the harm done to the second victim, the unborn child" ...
in addition, 35 other states have seperate bills addressing killing fetus.

 

[rudedog40]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
Again, wrong.
"The highest criminal court in Texas has held that killing a fetus before viability can be prosecuted as murder.
The court ruled in the case of Terence Lawrence, convicted of double murder for shooting and killing his girlfriend, who had been pregnant for six weeks or less, the Austin American-Statesman reports." Dated Nov 26, 2007

Yea, talk about a bible state. Rick Perry is so pro choice it's pathetic. Double murder, single, who cares. It's Texas baby. We fry 'em regardless.

 

[stdreb27]

I'm not picking on your journey, just pointing out some things that just don't make sense. Like how is one organization going to say 1.6 mil and the other one be 50% off? Or someone going to say they aren't leading an inquisition on tobacco users.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
So Clown Boy. Let's say your wife is at home alone, and some lowlife breaks into the house and rapes her. Couple weeks later, you find out she's pregnant. What do you do? Do you continue with the pregnancy and raise the child yourself, looking at it knowing it was conceived by some scum bag, or do you give it up for adoption, knowing that a child born by your wife is out in the world. Remember, abortion is out of the question.
Yet another "Straw Man".... As this is far, far from the norm in cases of abortion. You're trying to make up an ethical quagmire where one doesn't exist.

 

[rudedog40]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
See? Keep debating with me and you can learn things.
As I've stated, those are the most conservative numbers for abortions I know of. Many estimates put it well above 1 million per year.

Good. That's 1,000,000 that won't be on the streets selling drugs or living off of welfare. This country is getting overpopulated anyway. We need more abortions to keep the population down for all the illegal immigrants that sneak in.

 

[jonthefishguy]

This year was the 34th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that found a “right to privacy” in the Constitution, and twisted that newfound right into allowing abortion. Roe originally struck down abortion statutes in 46 states, declaring that the right to abort in the first trimester was absolute, restrictions could be made in the second trimester and third-trimester abortions could be banned. In a classic example of a slippery slope, the “right” to abortion has expanded in the decades since Roe. Most states pay for abortions with taxpayer dollars. 13 states plus DC, allow abortion at any point, right up to the day of birth. Ten states plus DC, don’t even require that abortions be done by a doctor. Since 1973, about 43 million abortions have taken place, creating a $400-million-per-year industry. Beginning in 1979, the Centers for Disease Control undertook a new surveillance of
ectopic pregnancy-related mortality, and published its first ectopic regnancy
surveillance report in 1982. As a result all deaths associated with ectopic pregnancy, whatever connection they might have with induced abortion, were excluded from the abortion death totals and the Annual Abortion Surveillance Reports. The CDC's new rule had a most pernicious effect: ectopic pregnancy deaths subsequent to induced abortions would no longer be counted in the abortion death totals but now all such deaths utomatically would be dumped into the pregnancy/childbirth maternal mortality statistics. The relation of such deaths to legal abortion would never be known, it at least by the general public. By the way if you do the math on the amount of abortions 43,000,000 and divide that by 34 years you get an estimated 12,647,705. But that also included all that were thrown in the same catagory.