Whateverman
Well-known member
How can anyone who's pushed back on news of the pandemic's effects here in the US claim to be "pro-life"?
They can't, of course. 'Pro-life' isn't about life at all; it's about posturing and being holier-than-thou.How can anyone who's pushed back on news of the pandemic's effects here in the US claim to be "pro-life"?
Pushed back?How can anyone who's pushed back on news of the pandemic's effects here in the US claim to be "pro-life"?
What a pile of horse ...They can't, of course. 'Pro-life' isn't about life at all; it's about posturing and being holier-than-thou.
NWRTWhat a pile of horse ...
That is a vague and overbroad claim/strawman. Worthless political talking point.How can anyone who's pushed back on news of the pandemic's effects here in the US claim to be "pro-life"?
"Pro-life" has never been an accurate term for opposition to abortion. Sacrificing the well being and happiness of a woman to an inanimate clump of cells isn't "pro-life" by any reasonable measure.How can anyone who's pushed back on news of the pandemic's effects here in the US claim to be "pro-life"?
Interesting essay. I agree with the vast majority of it, including the part about being willing to sacrifice the rights of the mother while calling yourself "pro-life","Pro-life" has never been an accurate term for opposition to abortion. Sacrificing the well being and happiness of a woman to an inanimate clump of cells isn't "pro-life" by any reasonable measure.
Relevant: https://peikoff.com/essays_and_articles/abortion-rights-are-pro-life/
"Planned Parenthood" has never been an accurate term for abortion - how can women who are not mothers be parents?"Pro-life" has never been an accurate term for opposition to abortion. Sacrificing the well being and happiness of a woman to an inanimate clump of cells isn't "pro-life" by any reasonable measure.
Relevant: https://peikoff.com/essays_and_articles/abortion-rights-are-pro-life/
Possibly one of the stupidest arguments seen here. Firstly many women who have an abortion already have children. Secondly the whole essence of planning is looking to the future."Planned Parenthood" has never been an accurate term for abortion - how can women who are not mothers be parents?
It is a carefully chosen name that seeks to dehumanize the unborn.
Those who have yet to have children are not planning for parenthood.Possibly one of the stupidest arguments seen here. Firstly many women who have an abortion already have children. Secondly the whole essence of planning is looking to the future.
My own son falls precisely into this bracket. It is a ludicrous statement.Those who have yet to have children are not planning for parenthood.
It is barbaric to slaughter innocent baby girls and boys in the name of convenience.My own son falls precisely into this bracket. It is a ludicrous statement.
It certainly would be. But this board covers abortion. What you are talking about is infanticide, not fashionable since Sparta.It is barbaric to slaughter innocent baby girls and boys in the name of convenience.
If it is emotional for you, then that would suggest your conscience knows I am right.It certainly would be. But this board covers abortion. What you are talking about is infanticide, not fashionable since Sparta.
A foetus is not an "innocent baby boy or girl". Most abortions take place before sex is determinable, though that really is not relevant. If you want to engage in discussion in this subject, and I accept that there are powerful arguments on both sides, please leave the simplistic, emotional inaccuracies to one side.
It is our responsibility to defend the woman and give her a voice. For she has been put upon and oppressed for centuries by men who believe that they have the right to tell her what to do with her own body. And she, unlike the foetus, is actually a person, with rights.If it is emotional for you, then that would suggest your conscience knows I am right.
At around 10 weeks, the fetus develops a cortex and can then feel pain.
After that, it becomes our responsibility to defend the defenseless by giving a voice to the voiceless.
That sounds nice, but said responsibility is universally abandoned once those voiceless leave the birth canal.After that, it becomes our responsibility to defend the defenseless by giving a voice to the voiceless.
The woman already has rights - the unborn potential citizen does not and that is an indictment on our society.It is our responsibility to defend the woman and give her a voice. For she has been put upon and oppressed for centuries by men who believe that they have the right to tell her what to do with her own body. And she, unlike the foetus, is actually a person, with rights.
The rights a citizen has change with the age of the citizen. Would you say that's just as much of an indictment, or is it just/correct to give different rights to a baby vs an adult vs an octogenarian?The woman already has rights - the unborn potential citizen does not and that is an indictment on our society.