Pro-lifer argument: "what if your parents decided to abort you?!"

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

Cool down. You seem to be overheating from your cognitive dissonance.



Inside a human, An unborn offspring with all organs present.

Hmm, definitely not a human being. It must be a digimon!

When you have an actual argument, get back to me. Thanks for the reply!

[apples]

my parents did abort me. i pulled myself up by own boot straps and started my own multimillion dollar company without their or anyone elses help despite being an unborn abortion. because im not a communist like all of you.

[Endus]

Again, all you're doing is belittling the argument of those who disagree with you. Which will never ever change anyone's opinion or contribute meaningfully to the debate in any way.

It's an argument that warrants belittling.

Like that of flat-earthers or chemtrail nuts.

I'm well aware it won't convince them to change their mind, but they've already decided that the facts don't matter, so nothing I say could ever do so. It's a waste of my time. What I can do is underscore how utterly without merit or reason their views are, so anyone undecided can make an informed decision on the subject.

Edit: I'm perfectly willing to dig into a reasonable argument, if one gets presented. The ones I'm belittling aren't reasonable. So really, provide a better argument, if you want me to give it serious treatment.

But killing Animals is still killing. We just accept it as a part of Nature. I've always been Pro-Choice to a point. That Point being if a Baby could be born premature and still live, then any Abortion past that point would literally be infanticide. Babies born after only 23 weeks can survive and have a higher survival than death rate. That is literally under 6 Month gestation.

Anyone that believes abortion should be able to be right up until the end of gestation are disgusting pieces of shit.

You really need to look into this more.

After the point of viability, abortions are only generally used in extreme circumstances, such as risk to the mother or massive injury/deformation to the fetus. Because there's an alternative; inducing labor. Given the size of the fetus, it's far less physically traumatic to the woman than a normal birth, and thus safer.

The thing is, in a country like Canada with no specific laws regarding abortion whatsoever, doctors still have medical ethics to abide by. The only reason for particular laws is to overrule the medical profession's ethical views on a subject. Pulling up some data, across Canada, 0.66% of abortions occur at that point. Pretty much exclusively due to major health risks to the pregnant woman or severe malformations of the fetus. Even without a law explicitly banning them, they do not occur at any significant rate, and those that do have justification.

[crewskater]

They've literally admitted that fertilized eggs outside of a woman's body wouldn't matter, because they're not in a woman's body.
You saying it's never been about controlling women doesn't change facts. The only one that's dense, is the person ignoring facts, I'd say.

It can't be about controlling women when they have more choices than men about getting out of being a parent. So I could say it's about controlling men as well. See how dumb of an argument that is?

[Nurasu]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/born-al...te-2019-02-27/ there are some.

Also this. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pro...-term-abortion

I didn't read the Fox News one, but the cbs one contradicts what you're arguing.

Democrats pointed out that doctors are already required by federal law to provide care to infants born alive after an attempted abortion. "It is, and always has been, a crime not to," Hirono said Monday.

I would point out that even if there are fringe leftists looking for abortions at any point in they choose in the pregnancy, the actual debate is centered on the up to 20ish weeks period. It's Republicans trying to change the pro-choicers arguments for them. All they are looking for is a right to choose, and by 20 weeks I think most would argue they've gotten the chance to do that.

- - - Updated - - -

It can't be about controlling women when they have more choices than men about getting out of being a parent. So I could say it's about controlling men as well. See how dumb of an argument that is?

I think we should do away with child support and go to forced joint custody instead, and see how many men would still be prolife.

[Ghostpanther]

I didn't read the Fox News one, but the cbs one contradicts what you're arguing.



I would point out that even if there are fringe leftists looking for abortions at any point in they choose in the pregnancy, the actual debate is centered on the up to 20ish weeks period. It's Republicans trying to change the pro-choicers arguments for them. All they are looking for is a right to choose, and by 20 weeks I think most would argue they've gotten the chance to do that.

- - - Updated - - -



I think we should do away with child support and go to forced joint custody instead, and see how many men would still be prolife.

Not really. There are some if they had their way, would push for the right of a woman to have a abortion up to birth. You would have seen that if you read the Fox news one. Blinders can interfere with our opinions at times.

[Lurker1]

My response to that argument: what if I wish that they did?

No thank im happy i exist for now.

- - - Updated - - -

It's an argument that warrants belittling.

Like that of flat-earthers or chemtrail nuts.

I'm well aware it won't convince them to change their mind, but they've already decided that the facts don't matter, so nothing I say could ever do so. It's a waste of my time. What I can do is underscore how utterly without merit or reason their views are, so anyone undecided can make an informed decision on the subject.

Edit: I'm perfectly willing to dig into a reasonable argument, if one gets presented. The ones I'm belittling aren't reasonable. So really, provide a better argument, if you want me to give it serious treatment.



You really need to look into this more.

After the point of viability, abortions are only generally used in extreme circumstances, such as risk to the mother or massive injury/deformation to the fetus. Because there's an alternative; inducing labor. Given the size of the fetus, it's far less physically traumatic to the woman than a normal birth, and thus safer.

The thing is, in a country like Canada with no specific laws regarding abortion whatsoever, doctors still have medical ethics to abide by. The only reason for particular laws is to overrule the medical profession's ethical views on a subject. Pulling up some data, across Canada, 0.66% of abortions occur at that point. Pretty much exclusively due to major health risks to the pregnant woman or severe malformations of the fetus. Even without a law explicitly banning them, they do not occur at any significant rate, and those that do have justification.

NAH i see a pic showing the earth is round then its round.

[Jeezy911]

I just tell people that women have a right to control their body. It’s nobody else’s business, and certainly not the governments.

Really, though, pro-lifers don’t want to hear anything. They’re set in their ways.

Most of us are not really interested in arguments on why it is OK to kill babies. You are definitely right on that.

[Nurasu]

Most of us are not really interested in arguments on why it is OK to kill babies. You are definitely right on that.

Liberalism is inevitable. Conservatism just sure is annoying in the meantime.

[Lollis]

Inside a human, An unborn offspring with all organs present.

Just because organs are present does not mean that they are fully developed, my grape vine has buds on it, doesn't mean I can make wine tomorrow.

Not really. There are some if they had their way, would push for the right of a woman to have a abortion up to birth. You would have seen that if you read the Fox news one. Blinders can interfere with our opinions at times.

Yes. The important word being 'some'.

Just like 'some' pro-lifers think that murdering doctors and bombing abortion clinics is a good thing to do and should be celebrated.

The number of people thinking that there should be late term abortions for reasons other than medical necessity are miniscule.

[Tom007p]

I think my parents said it best when they told me that there will be lots of people in this world that I will disagree with, but I don't need to force anyone to abide by my opinions because they're the "right ones". Ultimately creating opinion based rules for other people to follow is just idiotic, if you hate abortion then good for you! find a partner that shares that opinion and don't get one. However other couples getting abortions shouldn't matter at ALL to you, its their choice and they deserve the right to have one performed, simple as that.

[Draco-Onis]

Most of us are not really interested in arguments on why it is OK to kill babies .

Kind of laughable coming from a person who cheered for babies being ripped away from their mothers.

[parasight]

If you think this thread has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.

[Newname1234567890]

Sorry have they actually used this?

I wouldn't be alive?

But at the same time if my parents hadn't had a miscarriage I wouldn't be alive? (They wanted max two kids)

There are so many variables to being alive.

[Raelbo]

Most of us are not really interested in arguments on why it is OK to kill babies.

But no one is arguing that it is OK to kill babies. You're trying to strawman.

[Endus]

But no one is arguing that it is OK to kill babies. You're trying to strawman.

That's all they've got.

The facts don't support the religious viewpoint they hold, so they lie about the facts and hope nobody calls them out on it.

[Raelbo]

That's all they've got.

The facts don't support the religious viewpoint they hold, so they lie about the facts and hope nobody calls them out on it.

I love it when people try to use a strawman. As far as I am concerned it's tantamount to an admission that they don't have an actual argument.

[-Nurot]

Not really. There are some if they had their way, would push for the right of a woman to have a abortion up to birth. You would have seen that if you read the Fox news one. Blinders can interfere with our opinions at times.

That's absolutely a mischaracterized summary of the purpose of the proposed law. Good luck trying to find any licensed provider willing to carry out an abortion that late into pregnancy unless it's the mother's life on the line.

https://www.politifact.com/vermont/s...tions-right-m/

So while pro-lifers hang their hat on the strawman that women will turn out in droves and medical providers are going to start suddenly chopping up babies as they're born (Or as Trump likes to pretend/has said that it means that woman will give birth then decide if they want to abort.) they're in reality pushing for and passing-

1)Women being forced to give birth to their rapist's child.

2)Women being forced to give birth to the product of incest. (Especially regarding grooming)

3)Not applying these heartbeat bills to IVF embryos that get discarded or used for tissue.

What's the real argument? It sure isn't, all life is precious. It seems more like a control issue of, I was foolish enough to not use protection, got you pregnant and now I want to have the power to force you to carry to term. That really seems to be major sticking point through all the hypocrisy of the laws that these out of touch legislators are passing.

[smityx]

I would of never know since I was never born. What if you had signed a DNR and had a illness that would leave you comatose for several years but they found a miraculous cure during that time period. What if, what if...

[-Nurot]

It can't be about controlling women when they have more choices than men about getting out of being a parent. So I could say it's about controlling men as well. See how dumb of an argument that is?

It's called contraception. You know what lowers abortion rates better than forcing young girls to carry their rapist's child to term? Education and easy access to contraception. Funny enough pro-lifers seem to be against sex education in public schools and don't want to have their taxes to help pay for the healthcare to provide easy access to contraception methods for women.

You want a choice in the decision if the woman carries your child to term? Here's some novel ideas. Have consensual sex. Ask if she's on any form of birth control. If she's not and you really want her to carry your seed, mutually agree that becoming pregnant would be a good thing for everyone involved. If that's not something you want or are willing to do you have one more choice. Wear a condom.