Political Crossfire Forums

trawick · Joined: 25 Jan 2006 Posts: 7 Location: New York City

Pro-life is a misnomer. Most anti-abortionists are conservatives, and in almost every other area of their political make-up they are the very opposite of "pro-life." Yes, war. Yes, death penalty. No, health care. No, international court.

I'm not making any judgements about those political stances here, but am rather pointing out that abortion is the ONLY issue for conservatives in which the sacred value of "human life" comes into play.

Let's be honest: this is about sex, isn't it? This is just one more manifestation with the conservatives' endless fascination with human rutting. A woman gets pregnant through sex (bad), and must be punished with the physical and economic hardship of childbirth. Right? I mean come on, otherwise wouldn't you guys all be members of Amnesty International? If you're so "pro-life," you'd have a whole lot more to take issue with in this country than fetuses being aborted.

steen · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 1430 Location: Upper Midwest

Right on.

_reticentness · Joined: 15 Feb 2006 Posts: 11

I agree with you mostly. yeah, alot of people who are anti-abortionist support it for (what I think are) the wrong reasons. They don't want to face the consequences that come with messing around and having sex. Some politicians might support anti-abortionists to gain the support of the people.
However, there are some people who would support anti-abortion for the whole pro-life thing. So I can't say it's a misnomer with everyone. I think it just depends on who you're talking about.

galba · Joined: 23 Nov 2005 Posts: 675 Location: Texas

trawick wrote: Pro-life is a misnomer. Most anti-abortionists are conservatives, and in almost every other area of their political make-up they are the very opposite of "pro-life." Yes, war. Yes, death penalty. No, health care. No, international court.

I'm not making any judgements about those political stances here, but am rather pointing out that abortion is the ONLY issue for conservatives in which the sacred value of "human life" comes into play.

Let's be honest: this is about sex, isn't it? This is just one more manifestation with the conservatives' endless fascination with human rutting. A woman gets pregnant through sex (bad), and must be punished with the physical and economic hardship of childbirth. Right? I mean come on, otherwise wouldn't you guys all be members of Amnesty International? If you're so "pro-life," you'd have a whole lot more to take issue with in this country than fetuses being aborted.

I'm pro-life, anti-death penalty, anti-euthanasia and I do like at least some form of health care.

Coral · Joined: 13 Apr 2004 Posts: 2791 Location: Hold 'em, Texas

trawick wrote: Pro-life is a misnomer. Most anti-abortionists are conservatives, and in almost every other area of their political make-up they are the very opposite of "pro-life." Yes, war. Yes, death penalty. No, health care. No, international court.

I'm not making any judgements about those political stances here, but am rather pointing out that abortion is the ONLY issue for conservatives in which the sacred value of "human life" comes into play.

Let's be honest: this is about sex, isn't it? This is just one more manifestation with the conservatives' endless fascination with human rutting. A woman gets pregnant through sex (bad), and must be punished with the physical and economic hardship of childbirth. Right? I mean come on, otherwise wouldn't you guys all be members of Amnesty International? If you're so "pro-life," you'd have a whole lot more to take issue with in this country than fetuses being aborted.

Absolutely. It's a religious crusade positioned with enough spin to get some unsuspecting followers to crawl on board.

The Grandmaster

trawick wrote: Pro-life is a misnomer. Most anti-abortionists are conservatives, and in almost every other area of their political make-up they are the very opposite of "pro-life." Yes, war. Yes, death penalty. No, health care. No, international court.

I'm not making any judgements about those political stances here, but am rather pointing out that abortion is the ONLY issue for conservatives in which the sacred value of "human life" comes into play.

Let's be honest: this is about sex, isn't it? This is just one more manifestation with the conservatives' endless fascination with human rutting. A woman gets pregnant through sex (bad), and must be punished with the physical and economic hardship of childbirth. Right? I mean come on, otherwise wouldn't you guys all be members of Amnesty International? If you're so "pro-life," you'd have a whole lot more to take issue with in this country than fetuses being aborted.

Welcome to the forums trawick. This is what one of the most patently true and correct posts I have ever read on all of PC. I have said this very thing many times, and here, you have stated it about as well as possible. The answer is a resounding yes, to the main question of the thread. Prepare yourself though trawick, many of the anti-choicers are going to attack you very soon, claiming your position is a generalization or outright wrong. Do not worry, I will help you fight them. Every word out of their mouths basically proves what you say, and solidifies their puritan, prudish stance. They claim to want to protect a life where there does not exist one, all the while, hoping to wipe out as much as possible what they consider to be one of life’s most horrible abominations, that of free sex.

Coral wrote:
Absolutely. It's a religious crusade positioned with enough spin to get some unsuspecting followers to crawl on board.

Exactly. They use a few buzzwords and hope people roll over and play dead, all the while, trying to curtail what their religious fairly tales and cartoons in the sky all deem in immoral and bad, namely, sex.

Sailor Moon · Joined: 22 Sep 2005 Posts: 2782 Location: O-town, Florida

trawick wrote: Pro-life is a misnomer. Most anti-abortionists are conservatives, and in almost every other area of their political make-up they are the very opposite of "pro-life." Yes, war. Yes, death penalty. No, health care. No, international court.

I'm not making any judgements about those political stances here, but am rather pointing out that abortion is the ONLY issue for conservatives in which the sacred value of "human life" comes into play.

Let's be honest: this is about sex, isn't it? This is just one more manifestation with the conservatives' endless fascination with human rutting. A woman gets pregnant through sex (bad), and must be punished with the physical and economic hardship of childbirth. Right? I mean come on, otherwise wouldn't you guys all be members of Amnesty International? If you're so "pro-life," you'd have a whole lot more to take issue with in this country than fetuses being aborted.

I am only pro death penalty for people who have killed more than one person, on purpose, and have a likliness of killing more.

War is how we GOT the freedoms that Roe vs Wade allowed, in the first place.. Ever heard of the Revolutionary War? Plus it saves millions of people from starvation, oppression, etc.. We are sorry you dont like it, but without it, you wouldnt be free, so tough.

I am pro health care nationwide, as long as there are income taxes, too. Actually I am more anti income taxes, though, but whatever.

I resent this post, because youre generalizing that all pro lifers must feel this way, when in fact, most people are at least semi anti abortion, even some of the pro choicers on here are.

conguy · Joined: 16 Feb 2006 Posts: 28

Hi I'm new to the forums and thought this is a good place to place my first reply.

Abortion is not about sex at all. Claiming that pro-lifers want women to suffer is absurd and wrong. We are against abortion because an innocent person is being murdered. While I am against the death penalty, the other side of conservatives support that practice because it is killing those who are guilty. The same goes for war. Abortion is different because the subject has never commited a crime.

Kt · Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 3806

conguy wrote: Hi I'm new to the forums and thought this is a good place to place my first reply.

Abortion is not about sex at all. Claiming that pro-lifers want women to suffer is absurd and wrong. We are against abortion because an innocent person is being murdered. While I am against the death penalty, the other side of conservatives support that practice because it is killing those who are guilty. The same goes for war. Abortion is different because the subject has never commited a crime.

Welcome to the forum, i do hope you enjoy your stay.

From now on, we are bitter rivals. :-D

conguy · Joined: 16 Feb 2006 Posts: 28

Shim Eun-Ha wrote:

From now on, we are bitter rivals. :-D

Thats wonderful :lol:

steen · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 1430 Location: Upper Midwest

conguy wrote: Hi I'm new to the forums and thought this is a good place to place my first reply.

Abortion is not about sex at all. Claiming that pro-lifers want women to suffer is absurd and wrong. Why? Because you say so?

Quote: We are against abortion because an innocent.. The embryo or fetus are very much guilty of using the woman's bodily resources against her will; that's not exactly "innocent."

Quote: ..person.. There is no "person" until birth. You need to check out Roe vs Wade for some factual information.

Quote: .. is being murdered... More nonsense. Murder is the illegal killing of a person, and abortion is legal.

Quote: While I am against the death penalty, the other side of conservatives support that practice because it is killing those who are guilty. The same goes for war. Abortion is different because the subject has never commited a crime. The "subject" is tissue. Its 'guilt" has no more relevance than the tumor removed during surgery.

conguy · Joined: 16 Feb 2006 Posts: 28

Hullo Steen! This forum is amazing! Instant replies, good fun! You cant get this from most other people.

Quote: Why? Because you say so?

The line was stating where I stand. The rest of the message explained the backup to my stance.

Quote:
The embryo or fetus are very much guilty of using the woman's bodily resources against her will; that's not exactly "innocent."

This, sheesh, I find this statement very barbaric. Pretty much all I can say is that human life is beautiful. The embryo is innocent because it has never acted in violence or lied to a friend. There are no problems with it.

Quote: There is no "person" until birth. You need to check out Roe vs Wade for some factual information.

R v W is the evil I am trying to fight. What it defined as life allows for the murder of thousands everyday. How can I look to that for definitions? Doing so would ruin my stance.

Quote:
More nonsense. Murder is the illegal killing of a person, and abortion is legal.

The same goes for this statement. Look up.

Quote:
The "subject" is tissue. Its 'guilt" has no more relevance than the tumor removed during surgery.

The subject is a living baby. A beautiful example of human life.

Coral · Joined: 13 Apr 2004 Posts: 2791 Location: Hold 'em, Texas

TheGrandmaster1 wrote: trawick wrote: Pro-life is a misnomer. Most anti-abortionists are conservatives, and in almost every other area of their political make-up they are the very opposite of "pro-life." Yes, war. Yes, death penalty. No, health care. No, international court.

I'm not making any judgements about those political stances here, but am rather pointing out that abortion is the ONLY issue for conservatives in which the sacred value of "human life" comes into play.

Let's be honest: this is about sex, isn't it? This is just one more manifestation with the conservatives' endless fascination with human rutting. A woman gets pregnant through sex (bad), and must be punished with the physical and economic hardship of childbirth. Right? I mean come on, otherwise wouldn't you guys all be members of Amnesty International? If you're so "pro-life," you'd have a whole lot more to take issue with in this country than fetuses being aborted.

Welcome to the forums trawick. This is what one of the most patently true and correct posts I have ever read on all of PC. I have said this very thing many times, and here, you have stated it about as well as possible. The answer is a resounding yes, to the main question of the thread. Prepare yourself though trawick, many of the anti-choicers are going to attack you very soon, claiming your position is a generalization or outright wrong. Do not worry, I will help you fight them. Every word out of their mouths basically proves what you say, and solidifies their puritan, prudish stance. They claim to want to protect a life where there does not exist one, all the while, hoping to wipe out as much as possible what they consider to be one of life’s most horrible abominations, that of free sex.

Coral wrote:
Absolutely. It's a religious crusade positioned with enough spin to get some unsuspecting followers to crawl on board.

Exactly. They use a few buzzwords and hope people roll over and play dead, all the while, trying to curtail what their religious fairly tales and cartoons in the sky all deem in immoral and bad, namely, sex.

GM1, I'm with you. They don't disquise it well, but well enough that a very small number of non-religious people don't connect the dots and feel that the cause has some merit. It doesn't take much investigation to identify the monkey grinder.

Sailor Moon · Joined: 22 Sep 2005 Posts: 2782 Location: O-town, Florida

Wow. Talk about a thread thats just FULL of generalizations and extremist remarks. I do believe that this is against the forum rules.

Read the sticky, ALL of ya.

Coral · Joined: 13 Apr 2004 Posts: 2791 Location: Hold 'em, Texas

Sailor Moon wrote: Wow. Talk about a thread thats just FULL of generalizations and extremist remarks. I do believe that this is against the forum rules.

Read the sticky, ALL of ya.

We're sticking to the topic. You're calling us extremists. That is attacking the poster and against the forum rules.

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

Quote: Why? Because you say so?

No, because it has nothing to do with wanting someone to "suffer".

It's an irrelevent opinion arrived at without logic.

:lol:

Quote: This, sheesh, I find this statement very barbaric.
Absolutely insane is how I would characterize it.

steen · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 1430 Location: Upper Midwest

conguy wrote: Quote: The embryo or fetus are very much guilty of using the woman's bodily resources against her will; that's not exactly "innocent." This, sheesh, I find this statement very barbaric. because I see it from the woman's view instead of from the fetus' or embryo's view. I see the same in YOUR attitude, though, because you see it from the embryo/fetus instead of from the woman's point. So we can spend time calling each other barbaric, you can call me pro-death, and I can call you pro-slavery.

Is that productive? Should I call you barbaric for your desire to oppress and enslave women for the sake of mindless tissue?

(yeah, there are lots of interesting ways of saying things in this debate. I would recommend that we keep the emotional histrionics to a minimum, so we actually can have a meaningful conversation.)

Quote: Pretty much all I can say is that human life is beautiful. So you can go and have your own life. You can not determine whether it is "beautiful" for somebody else. And I must have missed where you show compassion for the woman's right to be an individual person in her own right with the ability to control her own bodily resources.

(Are you beginning to get how easy it is to talk past each other here?)

Quote: The embryo is innocent because it has never acted in violence or lied to a friend. There are no problems with it. If it is using the woman's bodily resources against her will, then there are MAJOR problems with it. The woman wouldn't seek an abortion unless she saw a major problem with it. So your remark merely shows that you are unable to see the situation from her point of view, and thus that you are unable to provide meaningful responses to her.

Quote: Quote: There is no "person" until birth. You need to check out Roe vs Wade for some factual information. R v W is the evil I am trying to fight. What it defined as life allows for the murder of thousands everyday. How can I look to that for definitions? Doing so would ruin my stance. Roe vs Wade is what the law **IS** If you make claims about what things are right now, then you need to pay attention to RvW.

And RvW did not define "life." I would recommend that you are careful with what words you chose. The biggest fights here are per misrepresenting vocabulary or trying to use two dissimilar terms interchangeably.

Such behavior will instantly get your post hammered and end up having you looking willfully, flagrantly dishonest. Just friendly advice.

Quote: Quote: More nonsense. Murder is the illegal killing of a person, and abortion is legal. The same goes for this statement. Look up. SO you can say that you feel abortion should be murder. You can not justify a claim that abortion IS murder, because that would be false. Please pay attention to your claims.

Quote: Quote: The "subject" is tissue. Its 'guilt" has no more relevance than the tumor removed during surgery. The subject is a living baby. Ah, another absolutist claim. "Baby," of course, is the developmental stage that begins at birth, and thus it can not in an honest fashion be applied to the embryo or fetus. You can say that you FEEL it is a baby, or that it should be a baby, but when you claim that it IS a baby, expect to be challenged on the basis of you making false claims.

Quote: A beautiful example of human life. Not to the woman who seeks an abortion, so your remark is meaningless in that setting.

steen · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 1430 Location: Upper Midwest

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: Why? Because you say so?
No, because it has nothing to do with wanting someone to "suffer". Prove it. Talk is cheap. have you worked for the reduction of abortions? Are you advocating for effective, scientific sex-ed, better, cheaper and more available contraception, and more support for pregnant women and new families? If not, then your claim to be against abortion rings hollow and dishonest, indicating instead your support for unwanted pregnancies without access to abortion as a means of oppressing and controlling women.

So "put up or shut up."

Quote: It's an irrelevent opinion arrived at without logic.

:lol: And you are ugly and your mom dresses you funny. Are we done with silly stuff like that now?

conguy · Joined: 16 Feb 2006 Posts: 28

Steen, I appreciate the advice, although, the majority of people wouldn't say I am being dishonest.

On the other hand, do you truly think that humans are parasites? Past abortion, do you think that? If so, I can draw that there is no difference from killing a 4 year old or aborting a fetus according to you. If that is true, you preach the most evil word I have ever heard.

steen · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 1430 Location: Upper Midwest

conguy wrote: Steen, I appreciate the advice. The majority of people wouldn't say I am being dishonest. And I am saying that I hope you are not dishonest. Know, though, that you bear the "original sin" of pro-lifers and creationists coming before you and giving me bad experiences with dogma-influenced, emotions-only argument from these camps.

Quote: On the other hand, do you truly think that humans are parasites? No. But it certainly is true that from a strictly biological viewpoint, the products of conception at any stage is "parasitic" in its function.

Quote: Past abortion, do you think that? Past abortion, it is not possible to function in a parasitic fashion unless you somehow hooked yourself up to another person's bloodstream.

Quote: If so, I can draw that there is no difference from killing a 4 year old or aborting a fetus according to you. You actually cannot draw such a conclusion, at least not in a valid fashion, as the 4-year-old is not parasitic, and because the care of the 4-year-old is voluntary in that the parent has the option of turning over rights and guardianship to outside entities.

Quote: If that is true, you preach the most evil word I have ever heard. :-D Then it is good that it isn't true. :wink: