Planned Parenthood Director caught on tape selling aborted baby parts

There is also actions vs consequences.

Pro-lifer supporters, as a general group, support policies that lead to more abortion (and less support for the living).

Pro-choice supporters, as a general group, support policies that lead to less abortion (and more support for the living).

Of course, there are grey in between.

What's more important? One actions or consequences of one actions?

 

I'm not sure what, at all, you are claiming this...

 

So if I'm against free college and you're against right to life, then you are claiming to be more pro-Life than me... really? That's wacky. I'm on-board with almost everything else you listed, so I must be Super Pro-Life, huh?

Most states have fetal homicide laws. Try killing a pregnant mother and see how many murders you would be charged with. The pro-choice laws are the one exception in a society that largely values life except for 1) unborn babies and 2) especially egregious convicted capital criminals.

Name two groups that are more different but both have their "right to life" abridged...

 

You don't expect much personal responsibility, do you?

Pro-Lifers "support policies that lead to more abortion" and pro-Choicers "support policies that lead to less abortion."

REALLY?

I get what you are trying to do here. Pro-abortion folks want to skip the first hurdle-- the life of the baby-- as a non-issue and overwhelm that huge slight with a wagon-full of secondary issues... all of which are parental responsibilities.

I've raised four kids and aborted none. The Last Man on Earth?

 

If you are going to force women to have babies they do not want through the gov't, then you have to have the gov't pay for those babies and raise them as well.

 

The default position is right to life. If protected and nurtured every pregnancy has resulted in a dead or live birth of a human child-- no toasters, no iPads ever traveled down that vaginal canal.

Everyone has a right to life ... or had it until it was legislated out of existence for unborn children.

The government's primary interest is, and always will be, protecting innocent life. We have all kind of laws that are designed to do just that. You benefit from all of them. Maybe you even benefited from an earlier generation's discouragement of abortion; think about that. Today no one can't even walk up and punch you much less scald or decapitate you.

Just because someone "doesn't want" their baby any more is no justification for killing it. We don't let people do that with pets, even. Well, goldfish maybe. Is that the equivalent status being touted... a fetus = a goldfish?

Then there are those pesky fetal homicide laws that ruin the clean sweep for pro-abortionists.

 

Right, the pre-1973 reality of coathanger abortions at about the same rate as today, and double the rate of liberal "pro-life" Switzerland--minus a vaccine for polio, plus more maternal deaths, and more unwanted preganancies. swell.

The ugly reality is that you keep on debating against abortion with simplistic moral suasion but you won't and can't explain any set of policies you'd propose because you know what you'd propose is uglier and wouldn't work as well as the present.

If you want to hide away the ugliness, let me know which you're more comfortable sticking into jail for no good reason: mothers or doctors?

 

http://www.abortionfacts.com/facts/12

Coat-hanger abortions are but urban legend. Most were done in doctor's offices then as now not back alleys.

The vaccine for polio was developed two decades before Roe v Wade. Surely there are adequate methods for harvesting naturally available fetal tissue so we don't have to set up a slaughter line.

This is a rare admission from your side that abortion is a preferred method of birth control... "unwanted preganancies."

Anyone, anyone who takes an innocent life deserves to be in jail be it due to jealous love, workplace resentment or unwanted pregnancy. Of course, reasonable exception might should be made when the mother has to choose between her life and her baby's life.

Now that is a powerful and onerous choice to make!! Many mothers would still risk all for baby in stark contrast to mothers today who sacrifice baby for life choice.

 

What the heck is that source? You do realize that the aftermath of a coathanger abortion is peritonitis...and while it is clear as day to the physician...a woman undergoing a secret abortion won't simply divulge where her peritonitis arose from. I feel sorry that you have to visit sites like those to feed your ignorance. Do you really believe there was a registry for the secret non-physician performed abortion society that kept these things documented?

 

A woman undergoing an abortion in 1970 would likely go back to the doctor she went to for the abortion if something went wrong.

What the heck is YOUR source?

How many coathanger abortions do you know to have occurred? :grin:

 

You pro-lifers are such hypocrites. You don't actually care about children who are suffering and poor - no handouts - let them starve and suffer. You know how many kids are malnourished? but you put your religious beliefs and force them onto women - your "ethics" and religious ideas of conception but care nothing for real humans. It's such a gross hypocrisy.

 

Here are some articles from scientific journals citing empirical evidence.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2709326/

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_IAW.html

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22264435

http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/general/lancet_4.pdf


If you actually want to take the time out to read them, you would be doing yourself a great service before spewing nonsense.

 

As stated, there are actions and consequences. Fully accepting and considering both or just one? Your personal choice and responsibility. When actions is all you think of and not the full consequences of it, that's a lack of personal responsibility.

The effective way to reduce abortion is to reduce unwanted pregnancy, not policies that increases unwanted pregnancy or to punish women. Reducing unwanted pregnancy is more than just will, but full sex education, providing easy access to birth control, including after the fact, and so on.

In general, pro-life folks support policies that increases unwanted pregnancy and abortion rate. Those are real consequences of actions. Consider carefully and be responsible for your choice.

Look, if you truly want to be a warrior against abortion, the effective way is to put your fight toward reducing unwanted pregnancy. It can work. Your energy and many of pro-lifer energy not only doesn't work, but many time, make it worse. If you are, as a group successful, the consequences isn't reduced abortion rate, it's very likely an increase in abortion rate with real harm done to many women and families.

On the pro-abortion... there is no pro-abortion folks. That is such a slanted mind view that I think come from pain initiated distorted lens. I know of no one that want to get pregnant so that they can have an abortion.

As for personal, my personal families choice is pro-life. We made that conscious personal position a long time ago prior to starting our family. My choice for society can't be pro-life, the consequences of that is too damaging at this point in time. There may be a point in the future that that make sense.

 

"According to the World Health Organization (WHO), every 8 minutes a woman in a developing nation will die of complications arising from an unsafe abortion."

The US is not a developing nation. You are padding the stats to make your argument.

"• Nearly half of all abortions worldwide are unsafe, and nearly all unsafe abortions (98%) occur in developing countries. In the developing world, 56% of all abortions are unsafe, compared with just 6% in the developed world. [1]"

"Worldwide, 49% of abortions were unsafe..."

I'm not sure how you think these are relevant to US policy in 2016. In the US, poor women can probably get to an abortionist on a bus route with only a transfer or two; they don't have to traipse over a mountain or blaze a trail through the jungle.

I don't want anyone to die, but there is a national ethic at stake here.

 

You need to stop slandering with a broad brush. Where have I promoted starvation? As I've said a thousand times, my stance on this matter is not based on religious beliefs, but you'll keep asserting it because that is your chosen narrative.

I'm in sickened awe of a hypocrisy that will overlook killing a young life to prevent... what... an unknown future? Or a hampered lifestyle?

 

How do you so easily let the two people entirely responsible for this "problem" avoid their personal responsibility? My "action" is to let the baby live; the "consequence" is .... unknown. That is pretty much true for every single life, though.

Sorry but I'm not catholic; I'm not against birth control. Yes, the effective way to reduce abortion is to reduce unwanted pregnancy. Frankly, I'm more concerned about the "punishment" dealt to the innocent child than I am the mother. In most instances, she knew she was taking a risk of a pregnant outcome.

I have and I am.

... only if you tolerate reckless behavior. There is obviously more than just stopping the killing and that is first and foremost in my heart. The burden should lie first on the participants out there who want to be able to make babies and get rid of them as a means of family planning.

I don't buy that. If you tolerate it, you allow it and even support it by hiding behind the "choice." If we had a choice to act so definitively aggressive toward redheads, there would be a Lucille Ball Society demanding their protection.... as there should be. That is all I'm doing... protecting the innocent.

Some sixty million deaths in the US since 1973.... what could be worse?

 

Try harder

 

Forget folks. giddy is a lost cause.

 

It's the same process, no matter the age and, yeah, I'm pretty sure that many of those photographed were, in fact, legal abortions... a harmless medical procedure.

 

Ah, the group-think mentality has arrived.

How is aborting the baby really more pro-Life than defending its right to life.