Political Crossfire Forums

[X-Shocker]

Why am I pro-choice?

This is not a perfect world.
a)there are millions of un-wanted orphans available for adoption
b)I do not see pro-lifers snatching up these orphans
c)hunger is all around us
d)I do not see pro-lifers harboring these poor soles and curing the issue
e)there are rapes and molestations all over the world
f)it is against pro-lifers' agenda to allow these women/girls to abort this conception from evil
g)some pragnant mothers run into health issues which requires an abortion to save her life
h)it is against pro-lifers' agenda to have the embryo/fetus/whatever? aborted so in the end both mother and embryo/fetus/whatever? dies.
i)pro-lifers wants to limit choices to women/girls
j)pro-lifers are not pro-life; they murder abortion practitioners
k)pro-lifers become violent when their agendas are not heeded
l)pro-lifers are really just anti-abortionists and not truely "pro-life"

I was once told by my buddy, a pro-lifer, "no one wants an orphan unless the orphan is a baby" during our debate regarding the pro-life/pro-choice issue. His other agrument was "I am a Catholic, therefore I am pro-life." And yes, he pays the Pope for a guarantee spot in heaven: I simply believes in the Word.

Pro-Choice is not pro-abortion; it simply means each and every woman/girl has the right to choose according to her needs.

If this was a perfect world where none of the above is true, then I am 100% pro-life; truely pro-life, not just some one who hides his/her own crocked agendas behind the title "Pro-life".

[Enoch]

X-Shocker wrote: Why am I pro-choice?

This is not a perfect world.
a)there are millions of un-wanted orphans available for adoption
b)I do not see pro-lifers snatching up these orphans
c)hunger is all around us
d)I do not see pro-lifers harboring these poor soles and curing the issue
e)there are rapes and molestations all over the world
f)it is against pro-lifers' agenda to allow these women/girls to abort this conception from evil
g)some pragnant mothers run into health issues which requires an abortion to save her life
h)it is against pro-lifers' agenda to have the embryo/fetus/whatever? aborted so in the end both mother and embryo/fetus/whatever? dies.
i)pro-lifers wants to limit choices to women/girls
j)pro-lifers are not pro-life; they murder abortion practitioners
k)pro-lifers become violent when their agendas are not heeded
l)pro-lifers are really just anti-abortionists and not truely "pro-life"

I was once told by my buddy, a pro-lifer, "no one wants an orphan unless the orphan is a baby" during our debate regarding the pro-life/pro-choice issue. His other agrument was "I am a Catholic, therefore I am pro-life." And yes, he pays the Pope for a guarantee spot in heaven: I simply believes in the Word.

Pro-Choice is not pro-abortion; it simply means each and every woman/girl has the right to choose according to her needs.

If this was a perfect world where none of the above is true, then I am 100% pro-life; truely pro-life, not just some one who hides his/her own crocked agendas behind the title "Pro-life".

While I understand your point, careful with generalities. Yes, some pro-lifers advocate killing abortion doctors or become violent. But, that is a minority.

Just as some on the pro-life side generalize about those of use who are pro-choice, there are those on our side who generalize about pro-life. Be careful not to do that as it doesn't help in a debate.

Quote: Pro-Choice is not pro-abortion; it simply means each and every woman/girl has the right to choose according to her needs.
That was very well said, though.

[AmericaFirst]

X-Shocker wrote: Why am I pro-choice?

This is not a perfect world.
a)there are millions of un-wanted orphans available for adoption
b)I do not see pro-lifers snatching up these orphans
c)hunger is all around us
d)I do not see pro-lifers harboring these poor soles and curing the issue
e)there are rapes and molestations all over the world
f)it is against pro-lifers' agenda to allow these women/girls to abort this conception from evil
g)some pragnant mothers run into health issues which requires an abortion to save her life
h)it is against pro-lifers' agenda to have the embryo/fetus/whatever? aborted so in the end both mother and embryo/fetus/whatever? dies.
i)pro-lifers wants to limit choices to women/girls
j)pro-lifers are not pro-life; they murder abortion practitioners
k)pro-lifers become violent when their agendas are not heeded
l)pro-lifers are really just anti-abortionists and not truely "pro-life"

I was once told by my buddy, a pro-lifer, "no one wants an orphan unless the orphan is a baby" during our debate regarding the pro-life/pro-choice issue. His other agrument was "I am a Catholic, therefore I am pro-life." And yes, he pays the Pope for a guarantee spot in heaven: I simply believes in the Word.

Pro-Choice is not pro-abortion; it simply means each and every woman/girl has the right to choose according to her needs.

If this was a perfect world where none of the above is true, then I am 100% pro-life; truely pro-life, not just some one who hides his/her own crocked agendas behind the title "Pro-life".

Generalize and stereotype much? :roll:
John Salvi and other anti-abortionists made a lot of generalizations too before they took out guns and started shooting - you sure you want to sound that way?

My wife is pregnant (with our second child) and if her life were in danger, there'd be NO question in my mind - out it comes. Yes, me, a pro-lifer.

Rapes and health issues make up only a small percentage of pregnancies when it comes to abortions occurring. No, I don't have a link but it's a pretty well known fact.

Would I expect a rape victim to carry the child to term? No, I can't say I would - that would be horrible and a slap in the face, especially after what she has already been through.

Do I think WAY too many women have abortions because they and their partners were ignorant and not being responsible? Hell yes!

If abortion if the answer to unwanted kids, what do you say about all the kids wandering the streets homeless or ones that have homes and their parents don't give a damn about them? Any solutions there? Firing squad maybe?

Abortion would be a LOT less offensive to us if it were a drastic measure and a rarer occurance rather than a form of birth control....

[X-Shocker]

[quote="AmericaFirst"]

If abortion if the answer to unwanted kids, what do you say about all the kids wandering the streets homeless or ones that have homes and their parents don't give a damn about them? Any solutions there? Firing squad maybe?[/quote]

If they were aborted in the first place then there would be none roaming the streets. :wink: :lol: :lol:

In all seriousness: Do something about it, then. You are the pro-lifer, are you not?

[quote]Abortion would be a LOT less offensive to us if it were a drastic measure and a rarer occurance rather than a form of birth control....[/quote]
Easily said but not all pro-lifers do not share your softness towards abortion posibilities.

For the generalities of j and k, the word "some" have been used: my error in my haste.

[AmericaFirst]

X-Shocker wrote: AmericaFirst wrote:

If abortion if the answer to unwanted kids, what do you say about all the kids wandering the streets homeless or ones that have homes and their parents don't give a damn about them? Any solutions there? Firing squad maybe?

If they were aborted in the first place then there would be none roaming the streets. :wink: :lol: :lol:

In all seriousness: Do something about it, then. You are the pro-lifer, are you not?

Quote: Abortion would be a LOT less offensive to us if it were a drastic measure and a rarer occurance rather than a form of birth control....
Easily said but not all pro-lifers do not share your softness towards abortion posibilities.

For the generalities of j and k, the word "some" have been used: my error in my haste.


Actually, I don't think that is true. I think the larger portion of "pro-life" people just feel abortion is far too easy of an "option" and used too often. Given the cases of rape or health danger for the mother, I'll be willing to bet you dollars to doughnuts the majority of those considered pro-life would agree those are acceptable exceptions.

46 MILLION abortions occur worldwide each year

I'm willing to bet the LARGE majority of those are NOT the result of rape or in any way endangered the life of the woman.

They were more of an "inconvenience" to some (e.g., hard core pro-choicers and those not willing to be responsible for their actions) and the result of "a horrible mistake" to others (e.g., a lot of teenagers who end up pregnant).

THAT is what I mean about being too easy to get abortions. Do I want some poor kid seeking an illegal, probably harmful one? Hell no. Do I want to see less abortions and more responsible behavior? Damn right I do!

As far as the unwanted kids being aborted in the first place, that doesn't count. They come from the same type of people who are unwilling to take responsibility for their own actions and wanting the "easy" way out (i.e., having kids and then ignoring them) - two sides of the same coin.

[Selfish_Meme]

I think instead of making it harder to get abortions we should make it easier to keep kids.

[Sailor Moon]

Actually its more like 250 million worldwide, in 30 years.






Edited for my brain not working too well today.. forgive me again.. lol

[Hellflower]

Acutally I don't believe abortion is used as a form of birth control! It could only be a man that makes such a statement. I can tell you from experience having an abortion is not an easy choice to make and it is incredibly emotional and distressing. I believe for many women it is a last resort and stems from a capitalist system that does not put enough money and energy into making sure women have the necessary skills and financial security they need to bring a baby into the world. I believe in a woman's right to choose because they alone know whether they can cope in every way with a child.

[Sailor Moon]

X-Shocker wrote: Why am I pro-choice?

This is not a perfect world.
a)there are millions of un-wanted orphans available for adoption

And yet, you dont see the horrible implications of the use of the word "unwanted" to these children, as if theyre all deaf and dumb.

Quote: b)I do not see pro-lifers snatching up these orphans

Pro lifers RUN the adoption clinics, FYI...

Quote: c)hunger is all around us

Not really. You need to get educated, just like the rest of them, might I suggest the sticky for your reading enjoyment?

Or here:
http://www.justfacts.com/abortion.htm

Scroll down to "population" and see the truth- that there happens to be more food than we can eat, and that its GOVERNMENTS that starve people, not overpopulation...

Quote: d)I do not see pro-lifers harboring these poor soles and curing the issue

I do... See, cause pro lifers actually work and contribute to charities, and volunteer. And I happen to also know several pro lifers who have on various occassions, fed the homeless, and even one who is housing a stranger. I slept in her home while he was there, too, so dont blow all THAT smoke.

Quote: e)there are rapes and molestations all over the world

A good reason for men to be pro choice. Men who rape and molest and generally despise women.

Quote: f)it is against pro-lifers' agenda to allow these women/girls to abort this conception from evil

It is not the product of conception that is evil. It is the people involved with it who are.

Quote: g)some pragnant mothers run into health issues which requires an abortion to save her life

Pro lifers tend to support abortion to save a womans life, hence the term "pro life".

Quote: h)it is against pro-lifers' agenda to have the embryo/fetus/whatever? aborted so in the end both mother and embryo/fetus/whatever? dies.

Nope not at all, thats a wild generalization, at best.

Quote: i)pro-lifers wants to limit choices to women/girls

Life is not a choice.

Quote: j)pro-lifers are not pro-life; they murder abortion practitioners

Pro lifers who do this are generally mentally ill, and do not volunteer for any organization that is "pro life", therefore, these people kill because they are messed up, not because they are pro choice.

Quote: k)pro-lifers become violent when their agendas are not heeded

Again, see above.

Quote: l)pro-lifers are really just anti-abortionists and not truely "pro-life"

Whatever.. youre blanket statements not withstanding, you need to get a real education on abortion.

[ieatfood]

This is a perfect illustration of how most pro-choicers don't really understand why they are pro-choice.


THe actual reason why you are pro-choice is because you don't morally equate the act of abortion with infanticide.

Fundamentally, that is the only difference between you and a pro-lifer.

The other points you make are all true, but would be utterrly irrelevant if you thought abortion was on par with infanticide.

[thintheherd]

Hellflower wrote: Acutally I don't believe abortion is used as a form of birth control! It could only be a man that makes such a statement. I can tell you from experience having an abortion is not an easy choice to make and it is incredibly emotional and distressing. I believe for many women it is a last resort and stems from a capitalist system that does not put enough money and energy into making sure women have the necessary skills and financial security they need to bring a baby into the world. I believe in a woman's right to choose because they alone know whether they can cope in every way with a child.

I would beg to differ.. it has indeed been used as birth control. Irregardless, and though sorry about your past situation, however, I find it unbelievable that you actually find capitalism at fault here.

Q: Was it capitalism that got you pregnant? More importantly, do you see it as the responsibility of any government to "take care" of you once you have made a poor decision?

Outside of rape- the blame rests soley on the decision makers, not the entity that governs them. Dependancy is a disease.

[Justinian]

Why can someone be charged with double-murder when killing a pregnant women? However, that same little living being is never acknowledged in the case of abortion?

[ieatfood]

Justinian wrote: Why can someone be charged with double-murder when killing a pregnant women? However, that same little living being is never acknowledged in the case of abortion?

Why was OJ found innocent in a criminal case but guilty in the civil trial?

The law is just schizophrenic sometimes.

[Gilbert1908]

X-Shocker wrote: Why am I pro-choice?

This is not a perfect world.
a)there are millions of un-wanted orphans available for adoption
b)I do not see pro-lifers snatching up these orphans
c)hunger is all around us
d)I do not see pro-lifers harboring these poor soles and curing the issue
e)there are rapes and molestations all over the world
f)it is against pro-lifers' agenda to allow these women/girls to abort this conception from evil
g)some pragnant mothers run into health issues which requires an abortion to save her life
h)it is against pro-lifers' agenda to have the embryo/fetus/whatever? aborted so in the end both mother and embryo/fetus/whatever? dies.
i)pro-lifers wants to limit choices to women/girls
j)pro-lifers are not pro-life; they murder abortion practitioners
k)pro-lifers become violent when their agendas are not heeded
l)pro-lifers are really just anti-abortionists and not truely "pro-life"

I was once told by my buddy, a pro-lifer, "no one wants an orphan unless the orphan is a baby" during our debate regarding the pro-life/pro-choice issue. His other agrument was "I am a Catholic, therefore I am pro-life." And yes, he pays the Pope for a guarantee spot in heaven: I simply believes in the Word.

Pro-Choice is not pro-abortion; it simply means each and every woman/girl has the right to choose according to her needs.

If this was a perfect world where none of the above is true, then I am 100% pro-life; truely pro-life, not just some one who hides his/her own crocked agendas behind the title "Pro-life".

This is the kind of post that does nothing to advance any kind of worthwhile dialog and is posted to create controversy or out of ignorance.

It would seem much of your logic would also permit the killing of newborns since they face all of the same problems you lament.

And if you friend or you think he is reserving a place in heavan by writing a check or dropping a few bucks in a plate then he is practicing a different Catholicism than the rest of us.

[Ek0nomik]

thintheherd wrote: Hellflower wrote: Acutally I don't believe abortion is used as a form of birth control! It could only be a man that makes such a statement. I can tell you from experience having an abortion is not an easy choice to make and it is incredibly emotional and distressing. I believe for many women it is a last resort and stems from a capitalist system that does not put enough money and energy into making sure women have the necessary skills and financial security they need to bring a baby into the world. I believe in a woman's right to choose because they alone know whether they can cope in every way with a child.

I would beg to differ.. it has indeed been used as birth control. Irregardless, and though sorry about your past situation, however, I find it unbelievable that you actually find capitalism at fault here.

Q: Was it capitalism that got you pregnant? More importantly, do you see it as the responsibility of any government to "take care" of you once you have made a poor decision?

Outside of rape- the blame rests soley on the decision makers, not the entity that governs them. Dependancy is a disease.

Well of course it has been used as a form of birth control, look at the world we live in. Does it occur as often as people may think? That's the question on the board.

Hellflower wrote: I can tell you from experience having an abortion is not an easy choice to make and it is incredibly emotional and distressing.

The stress put on a women who is going to have an abortion can be huge. Unfortunately, it probably isn't a large burden for some individuals though. The right for women should be kept though.

Hellflower wrote: ...from a capitalist system that does not put enough money and energy into making sure women have the necessary skills and financial security they need to bring a baby into the world.

That statement has more truth to it than you may think thintheherd. I am not saying the capitalist system should be held completely responsible for individuals poor choices, but if you think about it, the capitalist system can play some fault.

Young adults are going to have sex, whether you want them to or not, it's part of life. I personally find absistence to be a joke. I have nothing wrong with someone who wishes to practice it, but safe sex is what should be taught in our schools. I don't think that I will be a virgin by the time I get married. It's a completely natural desire, and I don't think denying yourself natural pleasure should be deemed upon. Granted I have my own personal beliefs that sex should only occur within serious relationships, and that going out for a one night stand is just absurd, but that is a topic for another day. For every second spent on absistence, another 100 seconds should be spent on safe sex. Hell, in my dorm I'm one of the few who still hasn't made the decision to have sex. The promotion for condoms, and proper use of them should be greater. The promotion of just practicing more safe sex should be promoted more. It isn't something to be ashamed about, it's something that happens, and it happens everyday. Our society seems to cringe a bit when this topic comes into conversation though. I think Hellflower is right, I don't think we do put enough money into making sure women, or what I would like to believe, making sure that couples (man and woman) have the proper financial security and knowledge to bring a child into the world. I don't think abortions should be used unless proper measures were taken ahead of time, and the whole situation has been thought out thourougly, but that sort of restriction is unrealistic, and unconstitutional.

Don't take steps backward in the progress made for womens rights. Don't let your government come in and say what can or cannot be done with someones body.

[thintheherd]

Ek0nomik wrote: thintheherd wrote: Hellflower wrote: Acutally I don't believe abortion is used as a form of birth control! It could only be a man that makes such a statement. I can tell you from experience having an abortion is not an easy choice to make and it is incredibly emotional and distressing. I believe for many women it is a last resort and stems from a capitalist system that does not put enough money and energy into making sure women have the necessary skills and financial security they need to bring a baby into the world. I believe in a woman's right to choose because they alone know whether they can cope in every way with a child.

I would beg to differ.. it has indeed been used as birth control. Irregardless, and though sorry about your past situation, however, I find it unbelievable that you actually find capitalism at fault here.

Q: Was it capitalism that got you pregnant? More importantly, do you see it as the responsibility of any government to "take care" of you once you have made a poor decision?

Outside of rape- the blame rests soley on the decision makers, not the entity that governs them. Dependancy is a disease.

Well of course it has been used as a form of birth control, look at the world we live in. Does it occur as often as people may think? That's the question on the board.

Hellflower wrote: I can tell you from experience having an abortion is not an easy choice to make and it is incredibly emotional and distressing.

The stress put on a women who is going to have an abortion can be huge. Unfortunately, it probably isn't a large burden for some individuals though. The right for women should be kept though.

Hellflower wrote: ...from a capitalist system that does not put enough money and energy into making sure women have the necessary skills and financial security they need to bring a baby into the world.

That statement has more truth to it than you may think thintheherd. I am not saying the capitalist system should be held completely responsible for individuals poor choices, but if you think about it, the capitalist system can play some fault.

Young adults are going to have sex, whether you want them to or not, it's part of life. I personally find absistence to be a joke. I have nothing wrong with someone who wishes to practice it, but safe sex is what should be taught in our schools. I don't think that I will be a virgin by the time I get married. It's a completely natural desire, and I don't think denying yourself natural pleasure should be deemed upon. Granted I have my own personal beliefs that sex should only occur within serious relationships, and that going out for a one night stand is just absurd, but that is a topic for another day. For every second spent on absistence, another 100 seconds should be spent on safe sex. Hell, in my dorm I'm one of the few who still hasn't made the decision to have sex. The promotion for condoms, and proper use of them should be greater. The promotion of just practicing more safe sex should be promoted more. It isn't something to be ashamed about, it's something that happens, and it happens everyday. Our society seems to cringe a bit when this topic comes into conversation though. I think Hellflower is right, I don't think we do put enough money into making sure women, or what I would like to believe, making sure that couples (man and woman) have the proper financial security and knowledge to bring a child into the world. I don't think abortions should be used unless proper measures were taken ahead of time, and the whole situation has been thought out thourougly, but that sort of restriction is unrealistic, and unconstitutional.

Don't take steps backward in the progress made for womens rights. Don't let your government come in and say what can or cannot be done with someones body.
Thanks for the lecture Eko but I'm afraid you have misunderstood my position on this... Having not stated my stance on abortion- my questions were to discuss the 'capitalism at fault' issue raised by HellFlower.

Knowing what I know now however, the same could be asked of you.

Why do you think a government should not say what women can do with their bodies and in the same breath expect that same government to spend more resources in the interest of 'preparing them and 'helping them' with a child that is most likely unwanted?

Aren't you, in effect, saying "I don't want the government telling me what to do, but they damn sure better pay to educate/help me when I do something I probably shouldn't have!"

I'll save you the time, neither is a government function.

[Ek0nomik]

thintheherd wrote: Ek0nomik wrote: thintheherd wrote: Hellflower wrote: Acutally I don't believe abortion is used as a form of birth control! It could only be a man that makes such a statement. I can tell you from experience having an abortion is not an easy choice to make and it is incredibly emotional and distressing. I believe for many women it is a last resort and stems from a capitalist system that does not put enough money and energy into making sure women have the necessary skills and financial security they need to bring a baby into the world. I believe in a woman's right to choose because they alone know whether they can cope in every way with a child.

I would beg to differ.. it has indeed been used as birth control. Irregardless, and though sorry about your past situation, however, I find it unbelievable that you actually find capitalism at fault here.

Q: Was it capitalism that got you pregnant? More importantly, do you see it as the responsibility of any government to "take care" of you once you have made a poor decision?

Outside of rape- the blame rests soley on the decision makers, not the entity that governs them. Dependancy is a disease.

Well of course it has been used as a form of birth control, look at the world we live in. Does it occur as often as people may think? That's the question on the board.

Hellflower wrote: I can tell you from experience having an abortion is not an easy choice to make and it is incredibly emotional and distressing.

The stress put on a women who is going to have an abortion can be huge. Unfortunately, it probably isn't a large burden for some individuals though. The right for women should be kept though.

Hellflower wrote: ...from a capitalist system that does not put enough money and energy into making sure women have the necessary skills and financial security they need to bring a baby into the world.

That statement has more truth to it than you may think thintheherd. I am not saying the capitalist system should be held completely responsible for individuals poor choices, but if you think about it, the capitalist system can play some fault.

Young adults are going to have sex, whether you want them to or not, it's part of life. I personally find absistence to be a joke. I have nothing wrong with someone who wishes to practice it, but safe sex is what should be taught in our schools. I don't think that I will be a virgin by the time I get married. It's a completely natural desire, and I don't think denying yourself natural pleasure should be deemed upon. Granted I have my own personal beliefs that sex should only occur within serious relationships, and that going out for a one night stand is just absurd, but that is a topic for another day. For every second spent on absistence, another 100 seconds should be spent on safe sex. Hell, in my dorm I'm one of the few who still hasn't made the decision to have sex. The promotion for condoms, and proper use of them should be greater. The promotion of just practicing more safe sex should be promoted more. It isn't something to be ashamed about, it's something that happens, and it happens everyday. Our society seems to cringe a bit when this topic comes into conversation though. I think Hellflower is right, I don't think we do put enough money into making sure women, or what I would like to believe, making sure that couples (man and woman) have the proper financial security and knowledge to bring a child into the world. I don't think abortions should be used unless proper measures were taken ahead of time, and the whole situation has been thought out thourougly, but that sort of restriction is unrealistic, and unconstitutional.

Don't take steps backward in the progress made for womens rights. Don't let your government come in and say what can or cannot be done with someones body.
Thanks for the lecture Eko but I'm afraid you have misunderstood my position on this... Having not stated my stance on abortion- my questions were to discuss the 'capitalism at fault' issue raised by HellFlower.

Knowing what I know now however, the same could be asked of you.

Why do you think a government should not say what women can do with their bodies and in the same breath expect that same government to spend more resources in the interest of 'preparing them and 'helping them' with a child that is most likely unwanted?

Aren't you, in effect, saying "I don't want the government telling me what to do, but they damn sure better pay to educate/help me when I do something I probably shouldn't have!"

I'll save you the time, neither is a government function.

I wasn't giving you a lecture, I was simply replying to:

thintheherd wrote: I find it unbelievable that you actually find capitalism at fault here.

And I apologize, a lot of my post wasn't directed towards you, rather general readers. Don't take it as if it was strictly to you. And my reply still wasn't holding capitalism for complete fault.

The point I was trying to make was that our government should be readily open to allowing the education on the subject. I believe the government should make any resources available, readily available to people. I don't think it's the role of the government to save everybody everytime they do something wrong, but it is their role to protect and educate. And we know that much is true, but yet there are limitations on what is taught because people don't like to face reality.

[thintheherd]

Ek0nomik wrote: I wasn't giving you a lecture, I was simply replying to:

thintheherd wrote: I find it unbelievable that you actually find capitalism at fault here.

And I apologize, a lot of my post wasn't directed towards you, rather general readers. Don't take it as if it was strictly to you. And my reply still wasn't holding capitalism for complete fault.

The point I was trying to make was that our government should be readily open to allowing the education on the subject. I believe the government should make any resources available, readily available to people. I don't think it's the role of the government to save everybody everytime they do something wrong, but it is their role to protect and educate. And we know that much is true, but yet there are limitations on what is taught because people don't like to face reality.

Fair enough and no sweat really. :)

I will have to disagree with you on two points though. I still don't believe it's the governments job to educate or protect (not at this level anyway).

[r4diohead96]

X-Shocker wrote: Why am I pro-choice?

This is not a perfect world.
a)there are millions of un-wanted orphans available for adoption
b)I do not see pro-lifers snatching up these orphans
c)hunger is all around us
d)I do not see pro-lifers harboring these poor soles and curing the issue
e)there are rapes and molestations all over the world
f)it is against pro-lifers' agenda to allow these women/girls to abort this conception from evil
g)some pragnant mothers run into health issues which requires an abortion to save her life
h)it is against pro-lifers' agenda to have the embryo/fetus/whatever? aborted so in the end both mother and embryo/fetus/whatever? dies.
i)pro-lifers wants to limit choices to women/girls
j)pro-lifers are not pro-life; they murder abortion practitioners
k)pro-lifers become violent when their agendas are not heeded
l)pro-lifers are really just anti-abortionists and not truely "pro-life"

I was once told by my buddy, a pro-lifer, "no one wants an orphan unless the orphan is a baby" during our debate regarding the pro-life/pro-choice issue. His other agrument was "I am a Catholic, therefore I am pro-life." And yes, he pays the Pope for a guarantee spot in heaven: I simply believes in the Word.

Pro-Choice is not pro-abortion; it simply means each and every woman/girl has the right to choose according to her needs.

If this was a perfect world where none of the above is true, then I am 100% pro-life; truely pro-life, not just some one who hides his/her own crocked agendas behind the title "Pro-life".

payden wrote: may i ask... (since you are pro choice) what about the choice of the baby?? the baby does not GET the choice. think about it.

[thisiscmd]

Quote: a)there are millions of un-wanted orphans available for adoption
You cannot possibly claim that your pro-choice argument is one of "we already have too many kids in the world..."
Quote: b)I do not see pro-lifers snatching up these orphans
So the only possible way to believe that aborting an unborn child is if you yourself have adopted in the past?
Quote: c)hunger is all around us
So the solution is less people? Because I am sure it is not a problem of getting the food to these people....oh wait maybe that's the problem.

Quote: d)I do not see pro-lifers harboring these poor soles and curing the issue
Just as ludacris as b. All people should be helping these "poor soles". However, whether or not one does this doesn't dictate one's ability to form an opinion regarding the morality of abortion.
Quote: e)there are rapes and molestations all over the world
I think your argument is that when women are raped they should be afforded the right to abort. I agree.
Quote: f)it is against pro-lifers' agenda to allow these women/girls to abort this conception from evil
So the reason your for abortion is because its against pro-lifers' agenda? Hardly a reason, more like you got tired towards the end of your post and are just ranting...
Quote: g)some pragnant mothers run into health issues which requires an abortion to save her life
This is the second reason that makes sense (see e)
Quote: h)it is against pro-lifers' agenda to have the embryo/fetus/whatever? aborted so in the end both mother and embryo/fetus/whatever? dies.
i)pro-lifers wants to limit choices to women/girls
j)pro-lifers are not pro-life; they murder abortion practitioners
k)pro-lifers become violent when their agendas are not heeded
l)pro-lifers are really just anti-abortionists and not truely "pro-life"
Most "pro-lifers" are against jumping off bridges...I can only assume you will now jump off one.
This post is ridiculous and I regret the time I wasted.