Alliedassault - View Single Post - SD bans almost all abortions, challenges Roe v. Wade

c312 · 02-27-2006, 10:09 PM

[quote:a2b21]Whatever.

The point I'm trying to make now is that you absolutely contradict yourself with your views.

It's so fucking pig-ignorant. You have been one of the most outspoken in your support of the war - and you have also been one of the most outspoken against killing unborn babies. When you supported your presidents actions to invade Iraq, you were supporting the potential deaths of thousands of people who have lived their lives innocently....and then you say there is no case for aborting babies, totally denouncing it....

You never once commented on whether or not you believe it's okay in some circumstances to abort a child (i.e in the situation of rape - which I prompted as a question a few times in this thread already) so I'm finding it hard to figure where you are coming from....but based on what I have read from you I'd say you were hard-line against it in all forms. Regulated or unregulated.

To say that and then not speak out against your government and instead totally support the actions just seem hypocritical....To be so supportive of a POTENTIAL life, and then so uncaring and attempting to justify life being cut short - It doesn't make sense. [/quote:a2b21]

In Iraq, people were being killed by Saddam. Just like I beleive fetuses are being killed in abortions. Same deal. Now, I know there is the fact that there would be innocent deaths in the Iraq War, but that number will be lower than the total number killed by Saddam already and in the future had he not been taken out of power. That's the difference for me. I care about the innocent lives lost in Iraq, but they were sacrifices made accidentally in order to ensure less deaths in the end. That's the way I see it, it's the same, I don't want to allow Saddam to kill innocents just like I don't want irresponsible mothers to kill innocent fetuses, that's clearly not contradiction, but similarity.

As for rape. I'm not as sure as the rape situation. Rape abortions are undoubtedly much more rare than non rape abortions. I can't say that I agree with aborting a fetus in that case because it's clearly still a life (to me) so that would be wrong. However, I don't think I have anything against the morning after pill for rape victims. As for the case where mothers are in danger, that's a doozy. I guess it would depend on the specific case, but I think I would generally side with the mother's health.

I hope that satisfies you because I'm pretty tired of arguing this, I've made my views pretty clear and I don't think anyone is gonna change their mind for reasons I've already stated, plus, I have two papers and two tests this week and I've already typed more in this thread than in the paper I'm working on right now.

	(#76)
c312 is Offline Command Sergeant Major Posts: 2,769 Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Virginia	02-27-2006, 10:09 PM [quote:a2b21]Whatever. The point I'm trying to make now is that you absolutely contradict yourself with your views. It's so fucking pig-ignorant. You have been one of the most outspoken in your support of the war - and you have also been one of the most outspoken against killing unborn babies. When you supported your presidents actions to invade Iraq, you were supporting the potential deaths of thousands of people who have lived their lives innocently....and then you say there is no case for aborting babies, totally denouncing it.... You never once commented on whether or not you believe it's okay in some circumstances to abort a child (i.e in the situation of rape - which I prompted as a question a few times in this thread already) so I'm finding it hard to figure where you are coming from....but based on what I have read from you I'd say you were hard-line against it in all forms. Regulated or unregulated. To say that and then not speak out against your government and instead totally support the actions just seem hypocritical....To be so supportive of a POTENTIAL life, and then so uncaring and attempting to justify life being cut short - It doesn't make sense. [/quote:a2b21] In Iraq, people were being killed by Saddam. Just like I beleive fetuses are being killed in abortions. Same deal. Now, I know there is the fact that there would be innocent deaths in the Iraq War, but that number will be lower than the total number killed by Saddam already and in the future had he not been taken out of power. That's the difference for me. I care about the innocent lives lost in Iraq, but they were sacrifices made accidentally in order to ensure less deaths in the end. That's the way I see it, it's the same, I don't want to allow Saddam to kill innocents just like I don't want irresponsible mothers to kill innocent fetuses, that's clearly not contradiction, but similarity. As for rape. I'm not as sure as the rape situation. Rape abortions are undoubtedly much more rare than non rape abortions. I can't say that I agree with aborting a fetus in that case because it's clearly still a life (to me) so that would be wrong. However, I don't think I have anything against the morning after pill for rape victims. As for the case where mothers are in danger, that's a doozy. I guess it would depend on the specific case, but I think I would generally side with the mother's health. I hope that satisfies you because I'm pretty tired of arguing this, I've made my views pretty clear and I don't think anyone is gonna change their mind for reasons I've already stated, plus, I have two papers and two tests this week and I've already typed more in this thread than in the paper I'm working on right now.