Abortion and Morality

[palerider]

I'm praying that you live somewhere in central Ohio. I would love to see your attempt to try and brow beat me...a man... the way you do women and not under cover of the computer. In fact I'd just love to see a picture of you to put a face with the chest pounding rant. I bet it would be very interesting.

No. I live in NC, near the coast. I fish out of Morehead City.

And what the hell are you talking about browbeating you...a man? I don't browbeat. I win debates by being right, not by browbeating. I deal in facts, not emotional hysterics and chest pounding is most certainly emotional hysterics. I have beaten you on every point by stating fact. You have yet to invalidate a single leg of my postion.

Well I do. There is nothing brave about downplaying the affect of RAPE on women. There is nothing brave about trying to force your own personal birth control beliefs on women. There's nothing brave about wanting to force a woman to incubate and bear a child against her will because you want it that way.

You don't know jack. I haven't downplayed anyting. I have stated that the source of any given trauma is not as important as how profoundly the person is effected by that trauma.

Prove that statement wrong if you can.

But I will say this. You are a very good wake up call to America that there are those like you who would gladly roll back the clock and do enormous damage to women... and I presume other groups as well.

Enormous damage to women? 40 million dead children and counting. Talk about terribly misplaced priorities.

What I can tell you is that I believe the pendulum has shifted away from this neo-con rhetoric in favor of moderate points of view. We saw this start with the last election and I believe it will continue through the presidential election in 08. We will see. [/COLOR]

What you believe, and what is are two different things. The fact is that abortion has weakened the left. Children tend to grow up in the political tradition of their parents. Those on the left are more likely to abort their children than conservatives and as a result, more people are growing up conservative than liberal.

The facts speak for themselves. Look at the 2000 census. States with high abortion rates lost representatives and electoral votes to states with very low abortion rates and all but one of them voted republican.

So, should I gather from your response that you don't want to go fishing?

 

[top gun]

palerider;20142]No. I live in NC, near the coast. I fish out of Morehead City.

And what the hell are you talking about browbeating you...a man? I don't browbeat. I win debates by being right, not by browbeating. I deal in facts, not emotional hysterics and chest pounding is most certainly emotional hysterics. I have beaten you on every point by stating fact. You have yet to invalidate a single leg of my postion.

What I said was... you couldn't brow beat me. I'm pretty certain you couldn't beat me at anything... but that's another story. In fact about all you seem to be able to do is insult and try to beat up on women. You think women that get RAPED should basically just get over it. There's not a lot of honor in that my friend. You want to strip away their control of their own bodies. You want to take away the most effective form of birth control. You deal in your own biased opinions backed up by Christian Conservative/neo-con statistics wherever you can find them. It's not a pretty picture.

You positions are not backed up by the Supreme Court and you are in the vast minority of the American people on wanting to overturn Roe.

Your Wile E. Coyote super genius belief that you know more than everyone that doesn't agree with you whether it be the majority of the American people, The United States Supreme Court or the world as a whole is pathetic.

I first had you pegged as a far right winger possibly handicapped with too much time on his hands living by the computer. I now believe it's more a case of just being old and frustrated with "woman" issues from the past. Please PM me a picture I want to see.

So to summarize you have won nothing. You just appear angry that anyone enjoys freedoms that you cannot control. I hope you find a way to get used to it because it's really not going to change your way no matter how much you complain. I'm serious.

 

[vyo476]

Pale rider, why do you believe that all right should be secondary to the right to live? Are there not worse things than death?

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

My apologies. I'll try to be more clear. You and palerider are engaged in a serious debate on the topic of abortion. You latest rant about how palerider is a heartless pig that reminds you of white supremacists has absolutely nothing to do with abortion. What I was trying to say was that I would like to see you at least attempt to refute palerider's arguments with evidence and logic, instead of namecalling and emotion.

I have already refuted Pale's arguments, as have several others, if you don't think so, then you need to reread the posts. My last post was a statement of why I was going to discontinue arguing with Pale. I thought that what I wrote was very clear, but I will explain it again.

USMC, you asked about my reference to the white supremacist. The point I made and will make again is that both Pale and this man used the SAME arguing technique: they started out with boundary conditions outside of which they would recognize nothing. If one did not agree with them then nothing that was said could be considered. Pale used the "liar, liar" defense incessantly despite the fact that I did not then and do not now have any reason to lie to him or about him. Even when I used his words, he would call me a liar. My quote below from my post is cogent and concise:
"I once had an argument/discussion with a white supremacist who was a lot like Pale. He had his argument down pat and he wouldn't deviate an inch from his position, he wouldn't even acknowledge that there WAS a position besides his own. Much like Pale, he had a set of "proofs" that black people were not human and nothing would shift him from that perspective. Just like Pale, he would ignore or misconstrue any fact or viewpoint that was not in line with his own."

"...palerider is a heartless pig..." C'mon, USMC, you're a moderator, the word "heartless" isn't even IN my post. The "pig" reference was a simile, the use of the words "like" or "as" to draw attention to a similarity. It's a recognized literary tool and is not name-calling.

My point in my last post was to make it very clear that Pale and I were not having a "serious debate on the topic of abortion", what we were having was a one-sided tirade in which Pale--like the white supremacist--would not even acknowledge that any position but his EXISTED. That is not a debate, hence the wrestling similie, it's fun for the pig, but it's useless and dirty for the person wrestling with it.

I don't know how I could possibly explain it more clearly than this.

 

[palerider]

What I said was... you couldn't brow beat me.[/B] I'm pretty certain you couldn't beat me at anything... but that's another story.

More chest thumping? What is it with you? You are behaving like a threatened ape. Is this how you react to everyone who disagrees with you? Puffing up and strutting around? And you have never laid eyes on me but are "pretty sure" that you can beat me at anything? Really? You want to measure e penises also?

In fact about all you seem to be able to do is insult and try to beat up on women. You think women that get RAPED should basically just get over it. There's not a lot of honor in that my friend. You want to strip away their control of their own bodies. You want to take away the most effective form of birth control. You deal in your own biased opinions backed up by Christian Conservative/neo-con statistics wherever you can find them. It's not a pretty picture.

I talk to women in the same way I talk to men (like you ) because I respect them. Backing off in an intellectual discussion because they are women seems to me, the height of insult. I could be wrong though. Let me ask?

To any of the ladies out there, do believe that men should give you a break during an intellectual discussion as if you aren't as bright as us?

And we all either get over the things that happen to us or we don't. You may not be aware of it, but rape isn't the worst possible thing that can happen to one? Do you believe that women are incapable of dealing with emotional and physical trauma? If so, I believe that you underestimate them terribly.

And I am not concerned with what women do to their own bodies. It is the small ones that are being torn limb from limb that I am concerned with. And have never suggested taking away birth control, I have said that I would stop distributing abortificients. You are not able to be honest about even the most basic point in this debate. You are as bad as mare.

You positions are not backed up by the Supreme Court and you are in the vast minority of the American people on wanting to overturn Roe.

And that means exactly what? They have reversed themselves no less than 200 times proving beyond a doubt that they are not infallable. I have gone into great detail explaining why the decision is unconstitutional and to date, you have been completely unable to defend it. You just hold it up as if it were a magical talisman like a cross to a vampire as if that constituted some sort of argument.

Your Wile E. Coyote super genius belief that you know more than everyone that doesn't agree with you whether it be the majority of the American people, The United States Supreme Court or the world as a whole is pathetic.

Juvenile name calling. Talk about pathetic. And if I am wrong, mr man, step up and prove it. I have laid out my position in language that anyone can understand, defeat a single point. So far, you haven't even put a scratch on any of them. You have engaged in emotional handwring, mischaracterizatio of the arguments you have been presented, chest thumping, puffed up strutting, and the list goes on but you haven't even began to engage a single point upon which my position is based.

I first had you pegged as a far right winger possibly handicapped with too much time on his hands living by the computer. I now believe it's more a case of just being old and frustrated with "woman" issues from the past. Please PM me a picture I want to see.

We have already established that you would make a piss poor counselor so save the psychoanalysis. If you are unable to engage my postion then step up like the man you claim to be and admit it rather than engaging in petty personal attacks.

So to summarize you have won nothing. You just appear angry that anyone enjoys freedoms that you cannot control. I hope you find a way to get used to it because it's really not going to change your way no matter how much you complain. I'm serious.

To summarize, I have won everything. My position is as follows:

1. Unborns are human beings.

2. Human beings have a right to live.

3. All rights are secondary to the right to live.

Exactly which one of those have you invalidated? To the best of my knowledge they remain unblemished and undefeated. Feel free, however, to bring forward any argument that you believe has defeated a single one of them.

 

[palerider]

Pale rider, why do you believe that all right should be secondary to the right to live? Are there not worse things than death?

It isn't what I believe vyo, it is what is. My arguments are based in the constitution and laws of this country. In our founding documents certain inalienable rights are acknowledged. They are the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Those documents are legal documents and when a list is written in a legal document, the order in which the items are listed is very important. They appear in decending order and even if you make a mistake and get the order of importance wrong, in a legal document, the order in which you listed them becomes their order of importance.

In the case of our founding documents, however, they got it right. Exactly what value would a right to liberty be to you if you had no right to live and what would a right to pursue happiness be worth if you didn't first have the right to be free to pursue said happiness and the basic right to live?

 

[palerider]

I have already refuted Pale's arguments, as have several others, if you don't think so, then you need to reread the posts.

Sorry mare, if you believe that you have refuted any of my arguments, you are lying to yourself. My arguments are as follows:

1. Unborns are human beings.

2. Human beings have a right to live.

3. All rights are secondary to the right to live.

Now I defy you or anyone else to bring forward a single rebuttal from anyone that invalidates a single leg of my position. I can't think of a reason to move an inch unless you can prove that the place where I am standing is an invalid one. Do that and I move, fail and I have no reason to move.

 

[top gun]

palerider;20182]More chest thumping? What is it with you? You are behaving like a threatened ape. Is this how you react to everyone who disagrees with you? Puffing up and strutting around? And you have never laid eyes on me but are "pretty sure" that you can beat me at anything? Really? You want to measure e penises also?

I've measured you by your responses. You are overcompensating for something my friend.

I talk to women in the same way I talk to men (like you ) because I respect them. Backing off in an intellectual discussion because they are women seems to me, the height of insult. I could be wrong though. Let me ask?

You just don't get it. There's nothing wrong with debate. There is something wrong when you spew insults and accusations into the bodily functions and emotional make up of issues that as a man you could not possibly fully understand. You act like a bully. I'm sorry I don't like bullies.

To any of the ladies out there, do believe that men should give you a break during an intellectual discussion as if you aren't as bright as us?

Personally I think everyone that's come up against you has a more correct, reasonable & moderate line and approach. You obviously can't see it but your great "intelligence" you speak of is self loving run amuck and little more. Bottom line... you can't intimidate the ladies either. Good for them!

And we all either get over the things that happen to us or we don't. You may not be aware of it, but rape isn't the worst possible thing that can happen to one? Do you believe that women are incapable of dealing with emotional and physical trauma? If so, I believe that you underestimate them terribly.

Nice.... very nice.

And I am not concerned with what women do to their own bodies. It is the small ones that are being torn limb from limb that I am concerned with. And have never suggested taking away birth control, I have said that I would stop distributing abortificients. You are not able to be honest about even the most basic point in this debate. You are as bad as mare.

You're a hero... in you own mind. Leave the women alone and let them make their own discussions on these highly personal situations that only occur in their bodies never in yours.
(and for the record if you just read my last post you'll clearly see I said you want to take away the womens most effective form of birth control referring to the Birth Control Pill that you constantly rail against)

And that means exactly what? They have reversed themselves no less than 200 times proving beyond a doubt that they are not infallable. I have gone into great detail explaining why the decision is unconstitutional and to date, you have been completely unable to defend it. You just hold it up as if it were a magical talisman like a cross to a vampire as if that constituted some sort of argument.

What it means is you're a loser before you even started.

Juvenile name calling. Talk about pathetic. And if I am wrong, mr man, step up and prove it. I have laid out my position in language that anyone can understand, defeat a single point. So far, you haven't even put a scratch on any of them. You have engaged in emotional handwring, mischaracterizatio of the arguments you have been presented, chest thumping, puffed up strutting, and the list goes on but you haven't even began to engage a single point upon which my position is based.

You're just silly. Just about everyone has made better points and have a more sensible, compassionate argument than you. Come on...

We have already established that you would make a piss poor counselor so save the psychoanalysis. If you are unable to engage my postion then step up like the man you claim to be and admit it rather than engaging in petty personal attacks.

I take it that means no picture then...

 

[palerider]

I've measured you by your responses. You are overcompensating for something my friend.

Well we have already examined your capacity as a psychologist, so you will pardon me if I express my complete lack of confidence in your ability to measure anything.

You just don't get it. There's nothing wrong with debate. There is something wrong when you spew insults and accusations into the bodily functions and emotional make up of issues that as a man you could not possibly fully understand. You act like a bully. I'm sorry I don't like bullies.

Spewing insults? That is your problem? Perhaps you should examine mare's posts before you accuse me of spewing anything.

Personally I think everyone that's come up against you has a more correct, reasonable & moderate line and approach. You obviously can't see it but your great "intelligence" you speak of is self loving run amuck and little more. Bottom line... you can't intimidate the ladies either. Good for them!

I am still waiting for you, or anyone else to produce a single argument that refutes the basic tenets of my position. Until you can, what you "think" is irrelavent.

]You're a hero... in you own mind. Leave the women alone and let them make their own discussions on these highly personal situations that only occur in their bodies never in yours.
(and for the record if you just read my last post you'll clearly see I said you want to take away the womens most effective form of birth control referring to the Birth Control Pill that you constantly rail against)

Is that your "professional" opinion as a councelor? Tell me, should we leave everyone else alone as well and let them decide to kill innocent human beings for reasons of convenience as well? Your argument fails on every level. A rational argument can be applied equally to every one of us, no pro choice argument can make such a claim.

What it means is you're a loser before you even started.

Since you are completely unable to defend the decision with any rational argument, I laugh in your face.

You're just silly. Just about everyone has made better points and have a more sensible, compassionate argument than you. Come on...

Bring forward a single point that has effectively rebutted a single leg of my position. You and mare keep saying that my arguments have been defeated but to date, neither of you has been able to produce a single statement that invalidates any of my three basic tenets. Short of defeating one of those, you are just bloviating.

I take it that means no picture then...

???

 

[Coyote]

There is no contest coyote. Being denied your one and only life because of the crimes of someone else is by far the greater wrong. I understand that we are talking about tough decisions, but any rational solution simply has to fall on the side of putting an end to the greatest wrong and I can't think of much greater wrong than killing a child either out of convenience or because of the crimes of its father.

And what if it kills the mother? Not only did she have no rights in the conception, but she has no rights in whether or not to keep it. What if she loses her job in the process? What rights does she have against a crime that was committed against her?

When it comes to a person's life in pregnancy you have two competing and valid sets of rights. I don't agree that the right to life trumps all other rights in all cases.

 

[top gun]

palerider;20205]Well we have already examined your capacity as a psychologist, so you will pardon me if I express my complete lack of confidence in your ability to measure anything.

I don't know... I think I'm pretty close.

Spewing insults? That is your problem? Perhaps you should examine mare's posts before you accuse me of spewing anything.

I've read Mare's posts. What you refuse to accept is you are not the only intelligent person on the board and you are not the authority here. You have an opinion. Opinions are like assholes... everyone's got one. The thing that cranks this debate up to such a fever pitch is this. You proclaim to know more than you could possibly know. You don't know about RAPE. You don't know and don't care about what the woman is going through by being pregnant but you insist that your values be forced on her private, personal decisions.

Here's the truth and and if you think about it you know it's true... you do not know anything about it. You claiming to understand or be an expert about RAPE or the pain and emotional baggage of being pregnant is like Mare telling me how it feels to be kicked in the balls. She doesn't really know!

I am still waiting for you, or anyone else to produce a single argument that refutes the basic tenets of my position. Until you can, what you "think" is irrelavent.

Is that your "professional" opinion as a councelor? Tell me, should we leave everyone else alone as well and let them decide to kill innocent human beings for reasons of convenience as well? Your argument fails on every level. A rational argument can be applied equally to every one of us, no pro choice argument can make such a claim.

See we come back to this. You are not the winner of this decision. This topic has been dissected, hashed and rehashed and litigated. I know you'd like to make us believe that there's some knew earth shattering information but there isn't. People have always been on the same opposing sides for the exact same reasons.

So when it comes to stating the obvious it's your "opinion" against the standing law all across the United States of America. It's your minority "opinion" when you compare the number of countries and populations of the world that allow abortion.

You have to admit this. Choice is legal today. Choice was legal yesterday. Choice was legal last year. Choice was legal a decade ago. Choice was legal 34 years ago. So there's been a long time to overturn a woman's right to choose but it hasn't been for a plethora of good reasons.

As far as removing the woman's right to choose, making the Birth Control Pill illegal and start throwing women in prison for murder for an abortion or for taking the Pill... It's possible the South might once again try to secede from the Union. I'd say one of these things is just about as likely as the other.

You see the work is not for us to do. All this side has to do is support the current law.

 

[Coyote]

I will say this. I do not think Palerider is a misogynist, and niether do I think he hates women. His arguments have been respectful when he is treated with respect. He is consistent and clear in his views and seldom throws emotion into the argument (except he starts on how many babies are being murdered, compares the trauma of rape to that of barking dogs, or talks about abortion as mere convenience thus minimalizing the ordeals involved in my mind). I think sometimes he sees it as too black and white where as I can not.

I do wonder one thing though. I have very seldom heard women express the view that there should not be an exception for rape. Perhaps I have just not read enough of the opposing view. It seems to me that those who argue against it argue from a primarily theoretical point of view. If they are men the question is academic. They will never be forced to face an unwanted pregnancy as a result of rape. They will never be put in the position of having someone else determine the outcome and make decisions about their own body as a result of that violent act.

The fact that someone could minimize rape to the point of comparing it to the trauma inflicted by a barking dog to me shows an insensitivity on par with those who view a fetus as nothing more then a lump of flesh.

Why is rape so casually regarded?

 

[palerider]

And what if it kills the mother? Not only did she have no rights in the conception, but she has no rights in whether or not to keep it. What if she loses her job in the process? What rights does she have against a crime that was committed against her?

12 in 100,000 coyote. That isn't even a good argument. And being killed compared to the rest? You believe there is a contest? And are you saying that you believe all abortion except in the case of rape and the health of the mother should be banned?

When it comes to a person's life in pregnancy you have two competing and valid sets of rights. I don't agree that the right to life trumps all other rights in all cases.

What you believe isn't as important as what is. Can you make an argument for abortion that can be equally applied to all of us or do you find that you must single "them" out as a special group to be denied rights?

 

[palerider]

I don't know... I think I'm pretty close.{/quote]

We have also established that you don't think much either.

I've read Mare's posts. What you refuse to accept is you are not the only intelligent person on the board and you are not the authority here. You have an opinion. Opinions are like assholes... everyone's got one. The thing that cranks this debate up to such a fever pitch is this. You proclaim to know more than you could possibly know. You don't know about RAPE.

I am sure that there are other intelligent people on the board. They are the ones who are not in this discussion because they realise that my position is unassailable.

I know that unborns are human beings. I know that human beings have a right to live. And I know that all rights are secondary to the right to live. Those aren't opinions top gun, those are the facts. You are unable to assail my position because your position is based on emotion, opinion, misunderstood science, and pure fantasy. If you had facts, you could as easily invalidate my position as I invalidate yours.

You don't know and don't care about what the woman is going through by being pregnant but you insist that your values be forced on her private, personal decisions.

Not my values, the very basis for the founding of this country. All rights are secondary to the right to live. No amount of emotional trauma that you could cause me or anyone else trumps your right to live. Your right to live outweighs every right of every citizen in the entire country unless you are threatening another's life. Like it or not, that is the way it is.

Here's the truth and and if you think about it you know it's true... you do not know anything about it. You claiming to understand or be an expert about RAPE or the pain and emotional baggage of being pregnant is like Mare telling me how it feels to be kicked in the balls. She doesn't really know!

I know that all rights are secondary to the right to live and no amount of emotional hadwringing on your part will change it. No human being has the right to kill another because that other is either inconvenient or dredges up bad memories.

See we come back to this. You are not the winner of this decision. This topic has been dissected, hashed and rehashed and litigated. I know you'd like to make us believe that there's some knew earth shattering information but there isn't. People have always been on the same opposing sides for the exact same reasons.

Nothing new and nothing earthshattering. Just enough evidence to undermine the roe decision. There is a growing body of legal precedent for the personhood of unborns and even at the time roe was decided, the justices stated that if personhood is ever established, roe falls. Well, it has been established.

So when it comes to stating the obvious it's your "opinion" against the standing law all across the United States of America. It's your minority "opinion" when you compare the number of countries and populations of the world that allow abortion.

A court decision does not constitute standing law.

You have to admit this. Choice is legal today. Choice was legal yesterday. Choice was legal last year. Choice was legal a decade ago. Choice was legal 34 years ago. So there's been a long time to overturn a woman's right to choose but it hasn't been for a plethora of good reasons.

Slavery was legal till it was overturned. All sorts of things have been legal based on court decisions till they were overturned. The decisions were overturned because they became indefensible, just like roe. And most of the 200 reversals that the supreme court has made stood longer than 34 years.

You see the work is not for us to do. All this side has to do is support the current law.

You support the law. Personally, I don't want that much blood on my hands.

 

[Coyote]

12 in 100,000 coyote. That isn't even a good argument. And being killed compared to the rest? You believe there is a contest? And are you saying that you believe all abortion except in the case of rape and the health of the mother should be banned?

You asked me that before and believe it or not it has been going round and round in my mind. I am very close to thinking yes. But I am not there yet.

What you believe isn't as important as what is. Can you make an argument for abortion that can be equally applied to all of us or do you find that you must single "them" out as a special group to be denied rights?

I will use the same argument I used before - you are already singling out pregnant women as a special group.

Reality is - pregnant women and unborn fetus' ARE a unique group of humans very different then any other in that rights are so tightly intertwined.