Political Crossfire Forums

[LostSoul3412]

JayDubya wrote: LittleAcorn wrote: JayDubya wrote: LittleAcorn wrote: I've been noticing that a lot of the pro-lifers on here are men. What I don't understand is why they are pro-life, when they will never be pregnant.

"Proud to be a gay, Liberal-Green fairy"

Neither will you.

Rape exists.

What's your point? You're still never going to be pregnant. You're assuming based on two seperate low probability events that a) you will be raped, and b) you will become pregnant from that rape. The likelihood of these two things happening to you are so astronomically low that there's no functional difference between our mutual likelihoods of having a child.

I'm sorry, but as a lesbian, your entire premise in this thread wreaks of total hypocrisy.

Low blow... the issue here is abortion, not a peron's sexuality.

[Lumina]

LittleAcorn wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote: If you look back through the pages you can see that a lot of the women who post at PCF one time or another posted in this section. The nature of the section does not keep people posting for long though. Its a pretty circular argument. Do you believe that an immature human life is worthless or not? Round and round we go.
I know a lot of women who are pro life, especially mothers.

I know that a lot of women are pro-life (unfortunately, because I've met them), but I simply said that a lot of men on here are pro-life. I didn't say that all of the pro-lifers on here are men.

The only reason it's a pretty circular argument is because I, the pro-choicer, keeps giving you arguments to which you, the pro-lifer, simply keeps repeating himself to a useless degree.

Not really--it's just that there's no point in debating with someone whose mind is already made up.

But if you can't see that you yourself are repeating yourself to a useless degree, carry on!

[JayDubya]

LostSoul3412 wrote: JayDubya wrote: LittleAcorn wrote: JayDubya wrote: LittleAcorn wrote: I've been noticing that a lot of the pro-lifers on here are men. What I don't understand is why they are pro-life, when they will never be pregnant.

"Proud to be a gay, Liberal-Green fairy"

Neither will you.

Rape exists.

What's your point? You're still never going to be pregnant. You're assuming based on two separate low probability events that a) you will be raped, and b) you will become pregnant from that rape. The likelihood of these two things happening to you are so astronomically low that there's no functional difference between our mutual likelihoods of having a child.

I'm sorry, but as a lesbian, your entire premise in this thread wreaks of total hypocrisy.

Low blow... the issue here is abortion, not a person's sexuality.

It's not a low blow given Acorn's assertion in the opening post in this thread. I'm a little bit homophobic myself, and I'll admit it, but all that means is there is an awkwardness I can't escape feeling. At any rate, that's not the case here.

That awkwardness does not translate into "this poster is gay, therefore I will always attack them or their position." In this particular instance, however, she stated that it's wrong for men to have an opinion on abortion because they will never become pregnant.

So for starters, I find that entire premise faulty simply because men have a responsibility to the children they sire and a further responsibility for what happens to them. The icing on the cake, however, would be that a lesbian is simply not going to become pregnant (unless she specifically wishes to do so). Therefore, how dare she make such a claim in the first place?

[LostSoul3412]

JayDubya wrote: It's not a low blow given Acorn's assertion in the opening post in this thread. I'm a little bit homophobic myself, and I'll admit it, but all that means is there is an awkwardness I can't escape feeling. At any rate, that's not the case here.

That awkwardness does not translate into "this poster is gay, therefore I will always attack them or their position." In this particular instance, however, she stated that it's wrong for men to have an opinion on abortion because they will never become pregnant.

So for starters, I find that entire premise faulty simply because men have a responsibility to the children they sire and a further responsibility for what happens to them. The icing on the cake, however, would be that a lesbian is simply not going to become pregnant (unless she specifically wishes to do so). Therefore, how dare she make such a claim in the first place?

I still believe that her question is prevalent considering the situation. Her question was directed at men, and I feel that we can answer while still respecting the individual posing the question in the first place.

Your personal views of homosexuality are not on trial, do not worry. But I do understand where you are both coming from. Just keep it in the context of abortion and within the context of this thread.

[LostSoul3412]

LittleAcorn wrote: So, if the government said one day that guys who had impregnated women had to cut off their testicles so that they couldn't make anymore babies, I could be pro-testicle-cutting (not that I would be), even though I will never have testicles?

Yes. It is your right to be able to form your own opinion on any issue. For example, I can be against the war in Iraq without being in the military. I can argue for homosexual marriage, even though I am not homosexual. I can debate the issue of abortion even though I will never become pregnant. I can even go so far as to support Israel in the current crisis, even though I live within the United States.

You do not have to be part of the afflicted demographic to form an opinion on it.

[Selfish_Meme]

Also though it is not obvious the abortion debate has far reaching implications about rights and morality well beyond the borders of just abortion. Defining what is life, when does it start, what about it is precious. When is it moral to end one.