• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Pro Life / Pro Choice Debate

Statistically speaking, it takes three years to reach a threshold of "millions" of abortions in the US (CDC). And the number of abortions has been declining.
 
Coach O said:
They don't "slaughter children." They perform legal abortions.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the landed class of low country South Carolina in the early 1800's didn't "have slaves." I am sure that according to them, they simply owned legal chattel.

Sometimes the law allows things that are morally wrong.
 
republicans would rather women shove coat hangers into their vaginas in a back alley or throw doctors in prison.

#progress
 
jhmd2000 said:
I'm sure the landed class of low country South Carolina in the early 1800's didn't "have slaves." I am sure that according to them, they simply owned legal chattel.

Sometimes the law allows things that are morally wrong.
Click to expand...

According to McGraw-Hill, they didn't have slaves.
 
Sure so the argument should be "abortion needs to be illegal" not "planned parenthood is violating laws, except whoops never mind we did research and they weren't but still lets crucify them in front of Congress"
 
Most of the federal funds Planned Parenthood receives are Medicaid reimbursements for services. Not rent, not utilities. Birth control. STD screening. Other health services. (And Bobby Jindal has already been taken to court to determine if he is legally allowed to cut off Medicaid to PP. The DOJ apparently thinks he is not.)

The rest of the federal funds they get through grants. I'm not sure what the oversight is on grants, I guess they could be used for rent and utilities. If Republicans are worried about that, they should ensure proper oversight.

Really, if the Republicans wanted to ensure that federal funds are not being used to subsidize abortions by paying for rent and utilities, they could do so, by focusing on the grants. I believe Congress even has control over the grants. That's not what they are doing, because it is more politically expedient to use PP as a political football.
 
Wrangor said:
It's politically expedient for both sides to use PP as a football. My disgust with the PP videos is that they actually show the reality that we are killing little people, as evidenced by the organs they harvest. Yet there is a large percentage of our population that is simply okay with that. We are blind as a nation in a very similar way to how we were blind to slavery. We will look back with great sadness on this atrocity.
Click to expand...

Perfectly stated.
 
I don't really see how Democrats are using PP itself as political expedience. More like they're using the GOP effort to defund PP - something Dems argue will actually likely increase abortions since a lot of the money that is taken away would be that money going towards contraceptive services - to point out that the GOP doesn't give a shit about women.

Slavery is a completely different topic than abortion IMO. Slavery dealt with the objective fact that a human was owned by another human and was rooted in a long-standing treatment of certain classss of individuals as property for economic gain. The dispute over abortion is over the subjective (potentially objective in medical terms although likely to still be dismissed by some who eschew scientific research on a variety of other topics - climate change, evolution) belief that fetuses up to a certain point are not humans and cannot feel pain, compounded by the autonomy of a woman to control her own body. There was no dispute that slaves were autonomous individuals on their own (medically or socially), just a debate over whether or not there was a god-given right for whites and the ruling class to "look out" for slaves for "their own good."

There is a medical debate over fetus v. person as well as a debate over a woman's autonomy - two additional layers that didn't exist in the slavery debate.
 
Last edited:
Wakeforest22890 said:
I don't really see how Democrats are using PP itself as political expedience. More like they're using the GOP effort to defund PP - something Dems argue will actually likely increase abortions since a lot of the money that is taken away would be that money going towards contraceptive services - to point out that the GOP doesn't give a shit about women.

Slavery is a completely different topic than abortion IMO. Slavery dealt with the objective fact that a human was owned by another human and was rooted in a long-standing treatment of certain classss of individuals as property for economic gain. The dispute over abortion is over the subjective (potentially objective in medical terms although likely to still be dismissed by some who eschew scientific research on a variety of other topics - climate change, evolution) belief that fetuses up to a certain point are not humans and cannot feel pain, compounded by the autonomy of a woman to control her own body. There was no dispute that slaves were autonomous individuals on their own (medically or socially), just a debate over whether or not there was a god-given right for whites and the ruling class to "look out" for slaves for "their own good."

There is a medical debate over fetus v. person as well as a debate over a woman's autonomy - two additional layers that didn't exist in the slavery debate.
Click to expand...

Which side of that debate is the Welfare State on in 2015?
 
Straw man please stay on topic. This is the abortion thread. There are other threads to discuss the "welfare state."
 
Wrangor said:
It's politically expedient for both sides to use PP as a football. My disgust with the PP videos is that they actually show the reality that we are killing little people, as evidenced by the organs they harvest. Yet there is a large percentage of our population that is simply okay with that. We are blind as a nation in a very similar way to how we were blind to slavery. We will look back with great sadness on this atrocity.
Click to expand...

4232430033_GoodGrief_703274_answer_2_xlarge.gif
 
Wrangor said:
It's politically expedient for both sides to use PP as a football. My disgust with the PP videos is that they actually show the reality that we are killing little people, as evidenced by the organs they harvest. Yet there is a large percentage of our population that is simply okay with that. We are blind as a nation in a very similar way to how we were blind to slavery. We will look back with great sadness on this atrocity.
Click to expand...

No. Incorrect.
 
Wrangor said:
It's politically expedient for both sides to use PP as a football. My disgust with the PP videos is that they actually show the reality that we are killing little people, as evidenced by the organs they harvest. Yet there is a large percentage of our population that is simply okay with that. We are blind as a nation in a very similar way to how we were blind to slavery. We will look back with great sadness on this atrocity.
Click to expand...

Have you seen the unedited videos? Because I've seem some videos that suggest the Borg will enslave (assimilate) us all.
 
have we convicted any abortion doctors of murder?
 
Wrangor said:
No double standard here. Keep moving along. No reason to mention the double homicide charge if you kill a pregnant woman. It is just a parasite, not a human.
Click to expand...
The "pro-birth" party weighs in. Please, continue with your comparison of suffering living children to aborted fetuses.
 
Abortion: When will we as a country wake up to the truth?

The same political party of people who hate abortion shrug when toddlers kill themselves with guns. Pure hypocrisy.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top