|
samie
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 665
|
Posted: 05-15-04 00:05am
|
|
|
|
Just claiming they are lies is not going
to convince anyone!
Elaborate on you claims that I and pro
life lie. I cant be bothered to jump
around the net looking at bloody poo.
I have read you link - she like you just
claims their lies gives no proof or back
up no statstics nothing. Poor, very poor.
I will dig up some pro choice lies and
give you some back up too!
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
oopoopoop
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Mar 2004
Posts: 1492
Location: ,
Thanks: 75
Thanked:5
|
Posted: 05-15-04 04:51am
|
|
|
|
|
That was an amazing article! It is
incredible what these people will do.
What kind of "proof" or "statistics" do
you want -- that was real life. Very cute
how they say she was deceiving them!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
purple333
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 01 Dec 2003
Posts: 1420
Location: Sydney
|
Posted: 05-16-04 23:45pm
|
|
|
|
|
Samie is just trying to get us to forget
that she was pro-choice, she had an
abortion! Then she felt guilty (maybe she
had it for the wrong reasons, maybe she
never fully considered all of the options
etc befroe doing it, whatever) & now
she wants to make us do what she chose not
to do.
In other words she wants us not to have
& not to support others having the
right to choose even though she herself
did have & used that right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2ferano
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Dec 2003
Posts: 3717
|
Posted: 05-17-04 07:32am
|
|
|
|
|
Aliens? Was that suppose to be a
legitimate example?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
samie
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 665
|
Posted: 05-17-04 20:11pm
|
|
|
|
|
Yes I think it was a legitimate argument,
I was trying to convey the idea that laws
would be better if they were passed on
statistical data and not on possibilities
and fear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JanetBee
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 28 Apr 2004
Posts: 332
|
Posted: 05-17-04 20:35pm
|
|
|
|
|
And they certainly shouldnt be based on
religious beliefs and superstition!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
samie
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 665
|
Posted: 05-17-04 20:57pm
|
|
|
|
|
True - to a point
a lot - majority of our laws come from
religious teaching - so what should
replace laws such as homicide laws and
theft laws and violence laws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
oopoopoop
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Mar 2004
Posts: 1492
Location: ,
Thanks: 75
Thanked:5
|
Posted: 05-17-04 21:43pm
|
|
|
|
|
Why should they be replaced? Laws are
continuously being amended as society and
culture changes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
samie
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 665
|
Posted: 05-17-04 21:47pm
|
|
|
|
|
Ok how would you amend them so they have
no religious bering?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2ferano
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Dec 2003
Posts: 3717
|
Posted: 05-25-04 15:32pm
|
|
|
|
|
You have to base laws at least partly on
"superstition and fear" as you put it.
Statistics are not correct.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
samie
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 665
|
Posted: 05-25-04 18:32pm
|
|
|
|
|
Ok on what superstions do we base laws -
arbitary superstions or more widely
accepted superstitions.
Do we base our laws on the superstion of
the few i.E the is no god or
do we base our laws on the superstion of
the many i.E their is a god.
Once you make argument for making laws on
fear and superstion then obviously you
must take into account the democracatic
structure and how that would relate to the
religious aspect of supersticious laws and
the abortion debate.
On this alone the abortion laws are in
fact anti democratic and anti religious
and therefore anti social.
You cant expect to argue both ways - but
even if you do there is logical arguements
and valid reasons why the laws are wrong
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
oopoopoop
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Mar 2004
Posts: 1492
Location: ,
Thanks: 75
Thanked:5
|
Posted: 05-25-04 19:58pm
|
|
|
|
|
Which laws are based on superstition and
fear, anyway?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2ferano
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Dec 2003
Posts: 3717
|
Posted: 05-26-04 07:00am
|
|
|
|
|
O.K, I am not getting into all of this.
All I am saying is in abortion you cannot
use only statistics to base laws and
arguments and whatever else. Statistics
are not correct.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
samie
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 665
|
Posted: 05-26-04 18:49pm
|
|
|
|
|
So we don’t use statistical data for laws
– so what do we use?
There is no evidence to suggest women have
“coat hanger abortions”
so why defend a law on that fear!
Even planned parenthood said 98% of all
illegal abortions world wide before roe v
wade were done by qualified physicans with
suitable medical equipment used in proper
medical facilities.
There are a lot more deaths from
abortion(not inc baby deaths) now than pre
roe v wade
so why do people use that pathetic
argument to keep legalised abortion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
oopoopoop
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Mar 2004
Posts: 1492
Location: ,
Thanks: 75
Thanked:5
|
Posted: 05-26-04 19:27pm
|
|
|
|
|
Once again you only believe the things you
want to believe. You are the one with the
pathetic arguments.
There is plenty of evidence that when
abortion is illegal, women may try to
abort on themselves. They may throw
themselves down the stairs to try to
induce a miscarriage, or get themselves
punched in the stomach, or take up
remedies (poisons) that are supposed to
induce an abortion, but are more likely to
kill them. Or they may go to doctors or
other practitioners, who take their money
and leave them to suffer the consequences,
and they are too frightened to seek
medical attention. They bleed to death.
If they are wealthy enough, they can go
to where it is legal. Every year,
hundreds of girls comes from ireland to
the uk for abortions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
samie
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 665
|
Posted: 05-26-04 20:26pm
|
|
|
|
|
There are no statistics to show any "coat
hanger abortions"
no eveidence!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
oopoopoop
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Mar 2004
Posts: 1492
Location: ,
Thanks: 75
Thanked:5
|
Posted: 05-26-04 20:42pm
|
|
|
|
|
Statistics? Like, how would you find
statistics on coathanger abortions?
Let's do a survey, pick a random sample of
people. "have you ever had a coathanger
abortion, sir? Madame?" well, true, in a
sample of 1000 people you might not find a
single person who did.
Evidence? You mean like people saying
they did it or knew someone who did? Or
does using something other than a
coathanger invalidate the concept?
But, heck, you probably reckon if someone
dies during an abortion they deserve it
anyway, right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2ferano
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Dec 2003
Posts: 3717
|
Posted: 05-27-04 06:55am
|
|
|
|
|
Samie can you not read or what? I said
we cannot base laws "only" on statistical
data. My goodness, pay attention.
And there is evidence (please learn how to
spell) of coat hanger abortions. I
personally know someone who performed one.
Not that she is proud of it, but then
who would be? People are not going to go
around admitting that they did.
"fear" only exists where necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
samie
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 665
|
Posted: 05-28-04 19:15pm
|
|
|
|
|
If (dubious) you know someone then maybe
she could give a written testimony to pro
choice, pro-life, medical and governmental
organisations since none of these have any
legitimate testimony of even one yes even
1 coat hanger abortion. Of course she
would have to under go some tests to see
if she was lying or not
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
oopoopoop
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Mar 2004
Posts: 1492
Location: ,
Thanks: 75
Thanked:5
|
Posted: 05-28-04 20:43pm
|
|
|
|
|
You are being really, really weird now.
Does it need to be a specific type of
coathanger? Would a wardrobe do?
|
|
|
|
|
