Political Crossfire Forums

[Gitana]

But it was on topic and quite simple: he was asking people to demonstrate their stated views about the value of human life, and how it related to embryos vs born children. It can't, by it's very nature, not be on topic. It appeared to be a simple experiment to see if people assigned more value to one or the other, which of course most would.

He was calling the more extreme prolifers here on their views, (as well as info gathering) and several disseminated, apparently because they did not want to think about their ideology vs a situational ethic - speculative or not. Which, in my opinion, if you are going to take a firm stand on an issue, you should have worked out how it may be applicable in all possible situations - or it's just pure ideology.

[Lumina]

Gitana wrote: But it was on topic and quite simple: he was asking people to demonstrate their stated views about the value of human life, and how it related to embryos vs born children. It can't, by it's very nature, not be on topic. It appeared to be a simple experiment to see if people assigned more value to one or the other, which of course most would.

He was calling the more extreme prolifers here on their views, (as well as info gathering) and several disseminated, apparently because they did not want to think about their ideology vs a situational ethic - speculative or not. Which, in my opinion, if you are going to take a firm stand on an issue, you should have worked out how it may be applicable in all possible situations - or it's just pure ideology.

The "extreme prolifers"?! How do you define "extreme"?

[aus blog]

I am a pro-lifer who has no religious convictions at all . I didn't need the fear of god or anything else to come to my decision, just a good sence of what is right and wrong.
You see we were all once a fetus. Is it beyond the realm of possibilities that when your mother first learned she was carrying you, she may have considered her options? What if she had decided to terminate? Would that have been OK?
You would not exist, if you have children they would not exist, and your (husband or wife) would be married to someone else. You would have been deprived of all your experiences and memories. In this day and age with terminations being so readily available and so many being carried out, if you make it to full term
you can consider yourself lucky. Lucky you had a mother that made the choice of life for you. Don't you think they all deserve the same basic human right, LIFE?
I'm all for contraception, prevention is certainly better than termination.
Did you know you can get an implant that is safe, 99.9% effective, and lasts for three years? Just think girls not even a show for three years, wouldn't that be great? I think too many people rely too heavily on the last option (abortion), I think if abortions weren't so readily available people would manage their reproductive system far better resulting in a fraction of the number of unwanted pregnancies.
World wide there are over 50 MILLION aborted pregnancies each year. In America 3,500 terminations carried out every day, that's over 1.3 million every year, 50% of all cases CLAIMED that birth control had been used, 48% admitted they took no precaution, and 2% had a medical reason. That's a stagering 98% could have been prevented had an effective birth control been used. Don't get me wrong, I suspect the percentages in Australia would be much the same.
Just a lot of unnessessary killing.
I am convinced that in the not too distant future, people will look back at many of the practices of today with disbelief and horror.



ausblog

[Obilisk18]

aus blog wrote: I am a pro-lifer who has no religious convictions at all . I didn't need the fear of god or anything else to come to my decision, just a good sence of what is right and wrong.
You see we were all once a fetus. Is it beyond the realm of possibilities that when your mother first learned she was carrying you, she may have considered her options? What if she had decided to terminate? Would that have been OK?
You would not exist, if you have children they would not exist, and your (husband or wife) would be married to someone else. You would have been deprived of all your experiences and memories. In this day and age with terminations being so readily available and so many being carried out, if you make it to full term
you can consider yourself lucky. Lucky you had a mother that made the choice of life for you. Don't you think they all deserve the same basic human right, LIFE?
I'm all for contraception, prevention is certainly better than termination.
Did you know you can get an implant that is safe, 99.9% effective, and lasts for three years? Just think girls not even a show for three years, wouldn't that be great? I think too many people rely too heavily on the last option (abortion), I think if abortions weren't so readily available people would manage their reproductive system far better resulting in a fraction of the number of unwanted pregnancies.
World wide there are over 50 MILLION aborted pregnancies each year. In America 3,500 terminations carried out every day, that's over 1.3 million every year, 50% of all cases CLAIMED that birth control had been used, 48% admitted they took no precaution, and 2% had a medical reason. That's a stagering 98% could have been prevented had an effective birth control been used. Don't get me wrong, I suspect the percentages in Australia would be much the same.
Just a lot of unnessessary killing.
I am convinced that in the not too distant future, people will look back at many of the practices of today with disbelief and horror.



ausblog

Umm...this is the second time you've done this exact post...in this thread. Worrying.

[Lumina]

Spammer. Shame too because at least one of the points made was sensible.

[Gitana]

Quote: In America 3,500 terminations carried out every day, that's over 1.3 million every year, 50% of all cases CLAIMED that birth control had been used, 48% admitted they took no precaution, and 2% had a medical reason.

Incorrect: last available stat was about 800,000-something. Also, it shows a bias when you capitalize "CLAIMED" - as if of course one should assume they were all lying. Nice.

Where did you get the stats for reasons given for abortion in the US, incidentally?

[Obilisk18]

Gitana wrote: Quote: In America 3,500 terminations carried out every day, that's over 1.3 million every year, 50% of all cases CLAIMED that birth control had been used, 48% admitted they took no precaution, and 2% had a medical reason.

Incorrect: last available stat was about 800,000-something. Also, it shows a bias when you capitalize "CLAIMED" - as if of course one should assume they were all lying. Nice.

Where did you get the stats for reasons given for abortion in the US, incidentally?

I have no idea where you've found your information, but this is simply untrue. I'll assume you're using CDC numbers to make your case. For the last few years the CDC has reported abortion numbers in the 850k range, but they've stopped reporting abortions in California, New Hampshire, and Oklahoma. Now this may come as a surprise to you, but those pesky Californians have alot of abortions. In fact, in 1996 they had 280k. So...that throws your whole theory out of the window. Also, the CDC always underestimates abortion numbers because of the way they conduct their data. The AGI numbers are much more reliable because they actually talk to the groups performing the abortions. I can't imagine why you'd choose misleading CDC numbers which are widely considered to be quite low over AGI (founded by members of Planned Parenthood...so hardly biased) numbers. Unless of course you just wanted to deceive people...nah.

[Selfish_Meme]

or it could be she was just unaware.....

[Obilisk18]

Selfish_Meme wrote: or it could be she was just unaware.....

Maybe. But I always find it convenient when a person posts the numbers the numbers that support their point without regard to reliability, or what those numbers actually measure. But fair enough, I'll give her the benefit of the doubt.

[Selfish_Meme]

Well it was the CDC, I probably wouldn't have been too critical of their information gathering either.

[Gitana]

I've always grabbed CDC stats - there was never a thought to deception (jeeesh; paranoid?) ...but thanks for the info, I will hereforth check both sources.

[Lumina]

I'm confused as to the identity of the "she"/"her." To which PCF poster are you referring?

And why would you object to the findings of both the CDC and the AGI?

[Gitana]

Go five posts up and reread them all in order.

[Lumina]

Thank you.

And why would anybody object to stats from the CDC or AGI?

[anselfir]

I would do nothing.