Abortion: Right or Wrong?

[ASPCA4EVER]

Pandora: I find it odd that you would be so very offended that he used the word slut in a general term yet you had no problem with letterman saying that Sarah Palin dresses slutty like airline stewards, insulting Mrs. Palin (who does not dress slutty) and also insulting thousands of airline stewards (who also do not dress slutty) And you had no problem with letterman insinuating a teenage girl is a slut also, but you are so outraged by a general statement named at no particular person. Is this manufactured outrage?

Well of course 'YOU' would fine it "ODD", you didn't even use David Letterman in your original post...you waited until I provided you with an excuse and then you awarded David Letterman with the "quote"...never-ever forget to provide your source or people won't think you are tracking very well!!!

Hmmm, worried about my 'oddity'...well isn't that just SPECIAL

No, poor unfortunate irrelevant Pandora...{sorry, I have to keep pointing this out to you as well as others around here...but repetitious seems to be the rule for your talking points} DAVID LETTERMAN IS A JOKE/COMIC NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY...HE GETS PAID FOR HIS FUNNY WAYS AND STUPID HUMOR! Whew, that felt good...maybe you will be able to ascertain the difference NOW??? {but I still have my reservations...you just can't focus}

 

[Pandora]

Well of course 'YOU' would fine it "ODD", you didn't even use David Letterman in your original post...you waited until I provided you with an excuse and then you awarded David Letterman with the "quote"...never-ever forget to provide your source or people won't think you are tracking very well!!!

Hmmm, worried about my 'oddity'...well isn't that just SPECIAL

No, poor unfortunate irrelevant Pandora...{sorry, I have to keep pointing this out to you as well as others around here...but repetitious seems to be the rule for your talking points} DAVID LETTERMAN IS A JOKE/COMIC NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY...HE GETS PAID FOR HIS FUNNY WAYS AND STUPID HUMOR! Whew, that felt good...maybe you will be able to ascertain the difference NOW??? {but I still have my reservations...you just can't focus}

Why would I use david letterman in my original post? It was to Bob not to you. I don’t think Bob has even added to the letterman controversy in our forum. He and I were talking about abortion and what type of women have them, not david letterman.

So david letterman calling Sarah Palin slutty looking is ok because he is a comic and this guy Bob, a new member posting on our boards can not use the term slut in a general way because he is more important than david letterman? Or he is to be taken more seriously than a comic?

 

[samsara15]

I think I was posting at the same time as you, sometimes when you post something then click refresh it puts other peoples posts above yours and you assume yours is the bottom one. I have missed a number of posts that way and came across them later.

I should have been kinder to the guy, but he got offensive, then aggressively persisted in his mistake, and I was offended and then took advantage of his laughable mistake. If he had been just a little bit nicer, I might have clued him in. Now I wouldn't tell him if H*** froze over. Let him figure it out. Maybe it will teach him to be a little kinder to other posters in the future.

I am very much struck by the connection to the Letterman incident.

 

[Pandora]

I should have been kinder to the guy, but he got offensive, then aggressively persisted in his mistake, and I was offended and then took advantage of his laughable mistake. If he had been just a little bit nicer, I might have clued him in. Now I wouldn't tell him if H*** froze over. Let him figure it out. Maybe it will teach him to be a little kinder to other posters in the future.

I am very much struck by the connection to the Letterman incident.

Well maybe you and he can start over from scratch? He seems really nice to me so far. But I can tell he does have a quick temper, and he has been pretty much attacked from his very first day here.

He should have been kinder to you, I agree... but I do think we as a forum have given a horrible first impression in general.

 

[samsara15]

These forums are rough places. Face it, people in the USA are very seriously divided over a lot of issues, and a lot of them are just dying to tell the other side how angry the other side's ideas make them. So angry they shoot from the hip without looking very clearly at the target. I don't think the talking we do here reduces the anger very much, but at least it helps a little bit to talk to the other side and realize that the other side are human beings, too, with their own ideas of what good intentions mean, however misguided.

 

[Pandora]

These forums are rough places. Face it, people in the USA are very seriously divided over a lot of issues, and a lot of them are just dying to tell the other side how angry the other side's ideas make them. So angry they shoot from the hip without looking very clearly at the target. I don't think the talking we do here reduces the anger very much, but at least it helps a little bit to talk to the other side and realize that the other side are human beings, too, with their own ideas of what good intentions mean, however misguided.

Yes, you are probably right, but I never used to think this forum was a rough place. Well one point in time when a canaidan guy came on, it got pretty rough. but other than that I have not thought of our forum in that way.

I am a member of a few forums that I rarely even read because its so negative. Maybe I just need a blogging break

 

[samsara15]

Well, at least it helps reduce the anger people feel a little bit, even if we do yell at each other, and even if it doesn't change anyone's opinions very often. That's something positive. Maybe the best we can hope for. And it helps a little to talk to the other side.

 

[Pandora]

Well, at least it helps reduce the anger people feel a little bit, even if we do yell at each other, and even if it doesn't change anyone's opinions very often. That's something positive. Maybe the best we can hope for. And it helps a little to talk to the other side.

That is what I like best about this forum, there are more who believe in things I do not than there are who believe the same as me. It’s nice to read other points of view and try to understand where they are coming from.

And that it is small enough that I can keep up on the threads and get to know the posters to some level anyways. Really large forums bother me.


I do not agree though about the yelling and stuff reducing the anger people have, I think it fuels it. I think the way you and I are talking right now does a ton more for the cause of getting along and understanding eachother. Sometimes you can not learn to respect another person’s point of view till you learn to respect the person who is presenting it. Dialog like you and I are having right now is a great first step

 

[palerider]

I believe a woman has the right to make the devastating decision whether to have an abortion up to 3 months of pregnancy. At 3 months the baby inside you has a developed nervous system. It can feel, past that they can hear your voice, and dream! It should be a crime after that point to have an abortion! 3 months is plenty of time to make a decision. Let's say the woman doesn't find out until after 3 months, I've heard plenty of stories of woman not even knowing they were pregnant until birth! There is always adoption! There are plenty of couples who can't have a baby of their own and dream of taking in that baby. We should better educate our children on safe sex by showing them what being a parent really is. The reality show "the baby borrowers" did just that! Really the only way I believe an abortion after 3 months is ok, is if the mother's life is in jeopardy, both may not even make it through birth.

What is the child in the second and third trimesters that it wasn't in the first other than more mature? It certainly isn't more alive or more human. Can you demonstrate in any conclusive way that your basic rights are dependent upon your level of maturity?

 

[palerider]

I thought the second trimester was a reasonable guideline, Roe Versus Wade. However, with severe birth defects or the threat to a mother's life / future health, I would extend that. I always place the interest of the mother's already existing life ahead of the infant's yet-to-be potential life.

The child from conception on is as alive as it will ever be. Your position is based in logical falllacy. You beg the question and simply assume that the child is not alive and the result is that all arguments that build upon that basic flawed premise are also flawed.

 

[palerider]

My wife was an adoptee, but she supports abortion rights. If you had not been born, you would not be able to regret it.

Not being able to regret being denied them is no rational basis for denying basic human rights.

 

[palerider]

Without the 'ACTUAL MEDICAL RECORDS' for the reason/cause that a doctor and the mother decides that a 'LATE TERM ABORTION' is the only 'OPTION'...would be like arguing you out of the reason why we grow up with unrealistic fears of the 'BOOGIE MAN/THE DARK/THINGS UNDER OUR BED'.

Your imagination has no foundation for your irrational thought process...but you'll cling to that as a 'LOGICAL TRUTH'...you are what you 'FEEL' and you are passionate about it too! Yet, you keep pleading with the rest of us to provide you a 'REASON' to change your mind...hmm How were you able to arrive at this 'LOGICAL TRUTH' without the facts and medical records that brought about this illogical thought processes??? Your 'LOGICAL TRUTH' is based only on what you were told by some wrong intentioned biased agenda driven humans! You've been brain washed and no one can change your mind and undo the fabrication that they {the agenda driven Pro-Life crowd} have provide you with!

The 'BOOGIE MAN' may still be out there lurking around every dark corner of the world just waiting to get 'YOU' too...LOL

Rather than doing your shuck and jive dance, how about you describe a situation in which a vaginal forced breech delivery of a dead child is safer for a woman than a vaginal delivery of a living child. In the congressional hearings, the pro choice side could provide no doctors who could describe the benefits of delivering a dead child over delivering a living child. Perhaps you know something that all the doctors congress could have called don't know. What is it?

 

[palerider]

Your ignorance and failure to respond to points about the topic is getting blatantly old and you have an abundance of pompous superiority that begs for sympathy and a passionate swift kick in the arse to restart your brain!!!

The ignorance seems to be on your part. I note that you have not even attempted to describe a senario where a forced breech vaginal delivery of a dead child is better for a woman's health than the vaginal delivery of a living child.

 

[palerider]

Space the Final frontier
that is the SPACE between Human ears!

... A woman gets off the bus and walks into a clinic .. (is she pregnant or just carring a bit of extra weight? ... & who's business is that?)
She is there for some time, (who is watching the clock here?) and then she leaves, gets back on the bus and is gone...
WHAT JUST HAPPENED? and without violating Doctor patient confidence, who's business is it to know?

What ... Big Brother is watching? BIG BROTHER IS A VOYEUR!

Privacy does not extend to protecting you from the consequences of killing another human being.

 

[palerider]

I see I was right; you have nothing to offer but insults. No dialog, nothing of value. You can not defend your beliefs, all you can do is scream nonsensical insults at members who disagree with you... yet you can not articulate why you believe what you do, even in something as easy as a hypothetical.

That is the nature of the poorest debaters on this subject. The direct jump to ad hominem attacks in lieu of any actual argument is a dead giveaway. I suppose he has already had his feeble arguments shreded for him on more than one occasion and simply can't deal with having himself a new one torn in public again.