Is pro-choice a rational position?

[overthere]

Your statement is not rational at all! Pro-life is about saving the life of the unborn.

Higher minimum wage? Are you kidding me?

How are those related to saving the life of an innocent child? What kind of rationalization is that?

Feel free to retain the fetus in your womb.

But do not ever have the arrogance to oblige another person to do the same.

That is pro choice Betsy.

It must severely chap your ass to realize you are so very far in the minority , and have no choice of ever forcing another woman to surrender her will to you in Canada.

[eyeball]

Higher minimum wage? Are you kidding me?

How are those related to saving the life of an innocent child? What kind of rationalization is that?

You're unaware of the relationship between poverty and higher abortion rates?

You think abortion is funny?

[jacee]

Slick, on 27 Jul 2016 - 12:00 PM, said:

It is very common for cons to want to force the maturation and birth of fetuses calling this position pro-life. However, it is also common for conservatives to:

- favour the death penalty

- oppose universal health care

- oppose gun restrictions

- limit access to birth control

- oppose worker rights and benefits

- oppose salary increases for the poorest

- support tax breaks for the wealthiest

- often oppose social program spending

How is it inconsistent? What's being anti-abortion got to do with all those?

Those are rather anti-life, not pro-life.

Being pro-life does not have to mean you have to oppose the death penalty

So you're not pro ALL life.

.

Edited July 29, 2016 by jacee

[betsy]

One of your sources in the OP from the 'DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD' has no mention of abortion' :This was the basis of the Convention of the Rights of the Child adopted by the UN General Assembly 30 years later on

20 November 1989. The Convention on the Rights of the Child was entered into force on 2 September 1990.'

Duh? Doesn't that support my argument?

Yes! 30 years later.......thanks to the feminist movement, they've changed it.

They stripped the unborn of his rights!

Edited July 30, 2016 by betsy

[betsy]

It all comes down to is I feel I do not have the right to tell another human being what to do with their body.

You do have the right to privacy. You don't have to tell anyone what you want to do....whether with your body or anything else. It's not like as if you're required to ask permission, or to make an announcement about what you're going to do.

However, if someone reports you because of an illegal act you've done.....be prepared to face the consequence.

A clinic, as an example, is required to report any gunshot wounds. Therefore we know right to privacy has its limit.

The Mandatory Gunshot Wounds Reporting Act, 2005 requires hospitals and other prescribed health care facilities to report to police, as soon as is practical, the following information about an individual with a gunshot wound:

• the name of the client, if known; and
• the location of the reporting facility.

http://www.cno.org/fr/exercice-de-la-profession/educational-tools/ask-practice/ask-practice-mandatory-gunshot-wound-reporting/

Edited July 30, 2016 by betsy

[betsy]

But neither of us judge others that make different choices because it is none of our buisness.

Of course you have the right to judge whether an action is right or wrong, legal or not. That's why you have your brains and capacity for critical thinking.....so you are able to discern what's right from wrong, good from bad.

If you're killing your child, I can make a judgement on your action and say that what you're doing is wrong!

If someone is committing murder, or an illegal act.....it is your duty to report it.

Abortion is legal, but that's what the pro-lifers are fighting to change. To restore the human rights of the unborn, that was stripped from him.

Edited July 30, 2016 by betsy

[betsy]

My wife goes visits her cult every Sunday with our children (the oldest quit going) I don't pester her about it because that is her choice.

Unless your wife goes to a real "cult".....to mockingly refer to it as a "cult," you've got a strange way of talking about her beliefs.

It bothers you, and more likely you and she have had some serious discussions over your children, spirituality-wise.

Abortion is legal and it will not change because a majority of people in this country are prochoice and only those that are committing political suicide bring it up.

You're right. Liberal thinking is so entrenched, and the continuous indoctrination to "progressive" thinking can only cement it for good. Maybe it will never change. But that doesn't mean there won't be attempts to bring about change.

Strange things had happened that had changed the course of history.

The First World War was in its last hours, millions of soldiers on both sides were dead and those who fought on knew the end was near, as did English Private Henry Tandey who served with the Duke of Wellington's Regiment.

In September of 1918, on the French battlefield of Marcoing, he won the Victoria Cross for bravery, one of many medals the 27 year old would win during the 'war to end all wars.' As the battle of Marcoing raged, Allied and German forces engaged in bitter hand to hand combat. The defining moment for Private Tandey and world history came when a wounded German limped directly into his line of fire.

"I took aim but couldn't shoot a wounded man," said Tandey, "so I let him go." Years later he discovered he had spared an Austrian Corporal named Adolf Hitler.

Hitler himself never forgot that pivotal moment or the man who had spared him. On becoming German Chancellor in 1933, he ordered his staff to track down Tandey's service records. They also managed to obtain a print of an Italian painting showing Tandey carrying a wounded Allied soldier on his back, which Hitler hung with pride on the wall at his mountain top retreat at Berchtesgaden. He showed the print to British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain during his historic visit in 1938 and explained its special significance.

The Führer seized that occasion to have his personal gratitude relayed to Tandey, which Chamberlain conveyed via telephone on his return to London from that most fateful trip.

Henry Tandey left military service before the start of World War II and worked as a security guard in Coventry. His "good deed" haunted him for the rest of his life, especially as Nazi bombers destroyed Coventry in 1940 and London burned day and night during the Blitz.

"If only I had known what he would turn out to be. When I saw all the people, woman and children, he had killed and wounded I was sorry to God I let him go," he said before his death in 1977 at age 86.

http://www.historyplace.com/specials/different/strange.htm

Strange things can happen again.

Edited July 30, 2016 by betsy

[betsy]

I have never understood that argument.

As a gun owner and man that loathes big government I have always been the outcast for when the right gets involved in the "bedroom" of people.

What's the bedroom got to do with abortion when it's not the sexual activity that's being discussed but rather the fate of the human being that's being oppressed?

As for your comment.....

You're saying child abuse can happen....and it's none of our business if it happens inside the sanctity of a home?

You support Sandusky's molestation of boys that had occurred in his own home?

Edited July 30, 2016 by betsy

[betsy]

I've seen this rationale given by pro-choice.

Any pro-choice who reasons that the woman has the right to murder the child that's taking nourishment from her, is supporting the murder of the unborn (at any time while he's in the womb).

You're saying it's okay to kill an unborn.....one minute before he gets born.

It's not only irrational......but definitely, that's a psychotic stance.

Edited July 30, 2016 by betsy

[cybercoma]

Duh? Doesn't that support my argument?

Yes! 30 years later.......thanks to the feminist movement, they've changed it.

They stripped the unborn of his rights!

Nobody, unborn or born, has the right to use someone else' shoddy and organs against their will. Full stop. What you call rational, logically extends to harvesting organs from people by force because it would save someone's life. That is a gross violation of human rights, even if it keeps someone else alive, because you have the right to security of your body and bodily autonomy. Should you donate your kidney to someone who needs it? That's for YOU and you alone to decide. No one else can force that of you. Since people have bodily autonomy that means not even a fetus has the right to grow inside of someone against that person's will. That is a violation of he person's bodily autonomy. That's the logic and ethics of abortion in a nutshell whether you agree with it or not.

[cybercoma]

I've seen this rationale given by pro-choice.

Any pro-choice who reasons that the woman has the right to murder the child that's taking nourishment from her, is supporting the murder of the unborn (at any time while he's in the womb).

You're saying it's okay to kill an unborn.....one minute before he gets born.

It's not only irrational......but definitely, that's a psychotic stance.

You know virtually nobody has an abortion one minute before a baby is born, right? There is not a single doctor in the country who would perform that, unless the child was very likely to die anyway and it was the only way to save the mother's life. If you want to make idiotic claims about people having abortions one minute before giving birth then back your BS up with facts and figures about how many times this actually happens. The answer for Canada is practically never.

[TimG]

You're saying it's okay to kill an unborn.....one minute before he gets born.

Kids are not adults until they turn 18. In some provinces the can't drink or by tobacco until 19. Life is filled with arbitrary lines in law because the law needs clear rules. Get over it.

If there was an actual problem with the current line I suspect people would be willing to move it back by 12-14 weeks but there is no problem because women and doctors in Canada show common sense.

[betsy]

Kids are not adults until they turn 18. In some provinces the can't drink or by tobacco until 19. Life is filled with arbitrary lines in law because the law needs clear rules. Get over it.

If there was an actual problem with the current line I suspect people would be willing to move it back by 12-14 weeks but there is no problem because women and doctors in Canada show common sense.

Surely, as depicted by most of the pro-choice excuses being given here, pro-choice definitely lacks common sense!

[?Impact]

Therefore we know right to privacy has its limit.

Brilliant observation. We are a nation under the rule of law, and that law of the nation does not make abortion illegal.

[?Impact]

You're saying it's okay to kill an unborn.....one minute before he gets born.

You're saying there is a big difference between a fully formed fetus and a collection of cells a few hours after conception?

[betsy]

Brilliant observation. We are a nation under the rule of law, and that law of the nation does not make abortion illegal.

Can't you understand what you read?

Who's saying abortion is illegal????

[betsy]

You're saying there is a big difference between a fully formed fetus and a collection of cells a few hours after conception?

EH? Your question doesn't make sense. <scratching head>

In fact, I've got to question if you KNOW that the fetus (fully formed or not), is a collection of cells.

[WestCoastRunner]

Duh? Doesn't that support my argument?

Yes! 30 years later.......thanks to the feminist movement, they've changed it.

They stripped the unborn of his rights!

The article you quoted gave no mention of abortion.

[overthere]

EH? Your question doesn't make sense. <scratching head>

In fact, I've got to question if you KNOW that the fetus (fully formed or not), is a collection of cells.

Your hair or toenail clippings are a collection of fully formed human cells.

With the right genetic manipulation, they could both be cloned into a human being.

We know that every sperm is sacred, would you extend that to every human cell?

[betsy]

Your hair or toenail clippings are a collection of fully formed human cells.

With the right genetic manipulation, they could both be cloned into a human being.

We know that every sperm is sacred, would you extend that to every human cell?

And?

[overthere]

And?

That is not an answer. Yes or no are both answers. Choose one.

[betsy]

That is not an answer. Yes or no are both answers. Choose one.

I agree with #1 and #2.

But what's the sperm gotta do with this?

Life begins with fertilization. Do you understand what that is? Yes or no.

[Ash74]

I agree with #1 and #2.

But what's the sperm gotta do with this?

Life begins with fertilization. Do you understand what that is? Yes or no.

By that rational "Life begins" when I forget the chicken on the counter for more than twenty minutes.

You have your definitions and I have mine.

If you are a vegan than you have a much better argument.

[WestCoastRunner]

Life begins with fertilization. Do you understand what that is? Yes or no.

This is where hypocrisy reigns again with the pro-life Christians. Many Christians use IVF as a means to overcome infertility. They also know that fertility clinics will typically create more embryos then they need to help ensure successful implants. Any leftover human embryos are either frozen and forgotten, used for other couples, used for stem-cell research or discarded as bio-hazard waste. There can be as many as 8-10 leftover human embryos.

Where is the outcry from these Christians over their personal unused 'human embryos'?

[betsy]

By that rational "Life begins" when I forget the chicken on the counter for more than twenty minutes.

You have your definitions and I have mine.

If you are a vegan than you have a much better argument.

I'm basing mine from science and logic. Refer to OP.

Where do you base yours?