Join Our Community!
Share
Debate Forums > Abortion Debate Forum > What drives me Crazy! (Page 5)
Avatar
NeutralUsername
on November 13th, 2008
Active User, very eHealthy
Milan wrote:
joeswife79 wrote:
I'm a nurse, dear - what are you?


So is Genene Jones. What's your point?

Quote:
which is what I was referring to

And we know this because.... Rolling Eyes

People are not mind readers and only know what you write. Imagine that.

Quote:
the complications you just described are the same as with most birth control.

Red herring.

Quote:
To use a colloquialism, that's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

To use another colloquialism, your logic is as dead as a doornail.

Quote:
I'm not anti-choice.

You're not Pro-Choice either.

Quote:
I'm anti-homicide

There you go being anti-American again putting down our troops.


It's anti-American to be against killing in war? Since when? Somehow, I bet you would call her a hypocrite if she was FOR war.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
Milan
replied on November 13th, 2008
Experienced User
NeutralUsername wrote:
It's anti-American to be against killing in war? Since when?
Since soldiers are trained to commit homicide, which she is against in ALL forms. Her words not mine Wink

BTW - she's also against people using self-defense, which is also a form of homicide.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
NeutralUsername
replied on November 13th, 2008
Active User, very eHealthy
Milan wrote:
NeutralUsername wrote:
It's anti-American to be against killing in war? Since when?
Since soldiers are trained to commit homicide, which she is against in ALL forms. Her words not mine Wink

BTW - she's also against people using self-defense, which is also a form of homicide.


I can understand the silliness being against self-defense (which is a natural instinct at times). But, what's wrong with being against soldiers killing other people? War happens to be unnecessary to some people.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
Milan
replied on November 13th, 2008
Experienced User
NeutralUsername wrote:
what's wrong with being against soldiers killing other people?
What I said was that she is against all forms of homicide. I am against wars too but I still support our troops. It's a necessary evil Wink When you can find a way to end all wars I will be the first in line to support you Wink Until then....
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
joeswife79
replied on November 14th, 2008
New User
Are you really that illogical? Is that all you can come up with? As for Genene Jones (a sorry excuse for a person), why is it that you care about babies that are minutes/hours old, but don't care about the ones living inside you? I told you I was a nurse because you claim I am uneducated, not because all nurses are saints (remember there are nurses working in abortion clinics). By the way, I am also a military spouse - currently living in The Netherlands. How un-American of me to support my husband and care for our children while he has been deployed 4 times now. Man, I am such a terrible person. There is a BIG difference between killing someone that is trying to kill you and killing an innocent. Again, nice try but I really think you should work on your debating skills. Maybe take a class - you might want to add logic as well since you seem to be lacking. As far as Pro-Choice - I am - abstinence, complete hysterectomy, adoption - there's 3 choices for you. I'm just not for all choices, especially yours.

Now, as the fact is I actually have a life, I have said my piece and am done. You may have your forum back to spread your propaganda. Obviously, logic is lost on you, so there is no point in continuing this discussion. I only hope that someone considering abortion will see our discussions, check my sources listed (all independent - thank you) and change their mind. Feel free to come back with whatever you like - considering I won't be returning you can have the last word to make you feel better.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
aochriss
replied on November 14th, 2008
Extremely eHealthy
Re: What drives me Crazy!
NeutralUsername wrote:
aochriss wrote:
phlem wrote:
Milan wrote:
Phlem I'm trying to offer you an olive branch and meet you half way here. Why is it that you feel that (Brad Pitt aside) women don't care about a man's body? Is it because men have no say so in what happens to the ZEF? Question
because if i had control of my own body i'd be sticking the bottle of morphine of my own choice into my own arm which is a part of my own body right now. just to help me forget that milan and others like milan are the ones who control this idiotic society. you don't like me participating in this debate but you don't give me the freedom of choice to numb my brain up enough so that i don't care about this debate.


I think drugs should be legal, also. It is an abomination that they aren't. You can thank fellow anti-choicers for drug laws, especially the drug laws that keep pain relieving medicine away from cancer patients.


Anti-choicers are the ones solely responsible for drugs being illegal? You think cocaine and other DANGEROUS drugs should be legal? Do you want more children to get a hold of these substances or what?


Oh yes, that's exactly what I want. Could you stop lying for a while?

I want drugs to be legalized but regulated exactly the same way other drugs are:
coffee, tea, alcohol, tobacco, ibuprofen, etc.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
aochriss
replied on November 14th, 2008
Extremely eHealthy
joeswife79 wrote:
aochriss wrote:
nightangel73 wrote:


Aya unborn and newborn child respond to threath of pain and death. Try to kill a newborn you will see it will try to do what he/she can to remain alive.


What exactly does an embryo, which is what we are talking about in the abortion debate, do when threatened with pain and death?


Actually, no - we are talking about all unborn babies. However, to answer your question. By definition an embryo, in humans, is what a baby is from the time of implantation until 8 weeks (after 8 wks it is called a fetus). According to modern science an embryo by 8 weeks can feel pain. Sir Albert Lilley, widely considered the "Father of Fetology", and unabashedly pro-life (as anyone with his vast knowledge of fetal development should be) makes some remarkable statements about fetal pain in an interview he conducted for the book The Tiniest Humans.

Question: In the case of an 8- to-10-week fetus, if you apply pressure will it tend to try to get out of the way?

Answer: Normally it would be extremely difficult, apart from putting a foreign instrument or needle into the uterus to apply pressure, but with a fetus at that maturity you have a very small fetus in a larger capsule of fluid. However, as the famous work of Dr. Davenport Hooker shows, in his many thousands of feet of film, babies at this maturity are responsive to touch.

The fetus also responds violently to painful stimuli-needle puncture and injection of cold or of hypertonic solutions- stimuli which you and I find painful, children will tell you are painful, and the neonate, to judge from his responses, finds painful.

---

I have been told by advocates of abortion that we have no proof that the fetus actually feels pain. Strictly, they are quite correct. Pain is a peculiarly personal and subjective experience and there is no biochemical or physiological test we can do to tell that anyone is in pain - a phenomenon which makes it very easy to bear other people's pain stoically, which is an important point for obstetricians to remember. By the same token we lack any proof that animals feel pain. However, to judge from their responses, it seems charitable to assume they do. Were this not so there would be no point in having an organization like the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, and I for one would be unhappy to think we would withhold from the human fetus a charitable consideration we were prepared to extend to animals.

Question: The question, then, of pain felt by the fetus - it is your personal opinion, I gather from what you say in your paper, that in effect the fetus does feel pain?

Answer: I can only say that the fetus responds violently to stimuli that you and I would find painful. Bertrand Russell once remarked that a fisherman had told him that fish had neither sense or sensation, but how he knew that the fisherman would not tell him.


(By the way, according to modern science - fish do feel pain).


You should at least acknowledge when you plagiarize
 a site like this: abort73.com/PDF/Abort73-I-A-2a-pain.pd

Did you notice that he does not come right out and say the fetus feels pain? That is because he knows it cannot, because it does not have a working brain. Use common sense.


btw, the majority of abortions involve embryos, not fetuses.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
joeswife79
replied on November 14th, 2008
New User
Please show me your source for your claim the majority are fetuses - from all sources I have been able to find they do not specify exactly. (Not that it matters anyway - once the egg has implanted itself it is a baby regardless of how old it is). This is the clearest one I have found (and it's from pro-abortion sources courtesy of The Alan Guttmacher Institute and Planned Parenthood's Family Planning Perspectives - you should like that).


Why women have abortions
1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).

At what gestational ages are abortions performed:
52% of all abortions occur before the 9th week of pregnancy, 25% happen between the 9th & 10th week, 12% happen between the 11th and 12th week, 6% happen between the 13th & 15th week, 4% happen between the 16th & 20th week, and 1% of all abortions (16,450/yr.) happen after the 20th week of pregnancy.

Likelihood of abortion:
An estimated 43% of all women will have at least 1 abortion by the time they are 45 years old. 47% of all abortions are performed on women who have had at least one previous abortion.

(by the way this is only in the U.S.)


Most women don't even find out they are pregnant until 6-8wks (missed period). and at 8 wks the embyo become a fetus. So, while (barely) the majority are aborted before 9wks - it does not divide that number to show how many are before the 8wk time frame. As for the website you got that interview from, sorry if they quoted the same source. I did not get it from there. However, truth is truth no matter where it comes from. I never claimed to interview the man personally. I'm pretty sure I said I am a nurse - not a journalist. He did not "come right out and say the fetus feels pain" because pain is entirely subjective. He can't say they feel pain anymore than he can say you feel pain. However common sense dictates that if they respond the same as you would to the same stimulus and you say it hurt - guess what - it probably hurts them too. Your dog can't tell you he is in pain when you stomp on him or hit him, but I (and apparently the doctor) would say it is safe to assume it hurts by his response. According to your thinking, it should be ok to hurt a mute person or a newborn because they can't tell us it hurts. You use common sense!
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
oopoopoop
replied on November 14th, 2008
Extremely eHealthy
If someone is assaulting you, and you hit them and they feel pain, well -- so?
Same thing for an invasive entity infesting your womb -- if it feels pain when you yank it out, that is just too bad. It should have infested someone else.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
joeswife79
replied on November 14th, 2008
New User
oopoopoop wrote:
If someone is assaulting you, and you hit them and they feel pain, well -- so?
Same thing for an invasive entity infesting your womb -- if it feels pain when you yank it out, that is just too bad. It should have infested someone else.



Wow and you wonder why people think all pro-abortionist are evil and stupid. You just gave the few who actually have some sense a bad name by spreading your stupidity.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
Birch
replied on November 14th, 2008
Extremely eHealthy
Keeping animals as pets is imprisoning animals. That's a new one! Ha ha ha! Yes, we should let all our dogs and cats free to roam the streets. I'm sure that would be best for them.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
oopoopoop
replied on November 14th, 2008
Extremely eHealthy
joeswife79 wrote:
oopoopoop wrote:
If someone is assaulting you, and you hit them and they feel pain, well -- so?
Same thing for an invasive entity infesting your womb -- if it feels pain when you yank it out, that is just too bad. It should have infested someone else.



Wow and you wonder why people think all pro-abortionist are evil and stupid. You just gave the few who actually have some sense a bad name by spreading your stupidity.


Ah, but I am one of the few people here, or probably anywhere, who is genuine pro-abortion. You will find that most are pro-choice, whereas I personally regard abortion is the vastly preferable option in everything except a minority of pregnancies.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
NeutralUsername
replied on November 14th, 2008
Active User, very eHealthy
Milan wrote:
NeutralUsername wrote:
what's wrong with being against soldiers killing other people?
What I said was that she is against all forms of homicide. I am against wars too but I still support our troops. It's a necessary evil Wink When you can find a way to end all wars I will be the first in line to support you Wink Until then....


Necessary evil? It doesn't sound like you are really against war.

You do know that innocent people can die in wars, too, right?

If a person IS against ALL forms of human killing (born, unborn), just what is wrong with that? How do you feel about people who are against the death penalty because of the posibility of an innocent person being put to death?
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
Milan
replied on November 14th, 2008
Experienced User
Birch wrote:
Keeping animals as pets is imprisoning animals. That's a new one! Ha ha ha! Yes, we should let all our dogs and cats free to roam the streets.
Sounds like a conspiracy from the people who run zoos giggle

If pets were roaming the streets most of them would be dead before the end of the week. I wonder if joeswife is going to clean up the mess? Wink
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
NeutralUsername
replied on November 14th, 2008
Active User, very eHealthy
Birch wrote:
Keeping animals as pets is imprisoning animals. That's a new one! Ha ha ha! Yes, we should let all our dogs and cats free to roam the streets. I'm sure that would be best for them.


Actually, to me it depends on the kind of pet and how much they are confined. For example, it's not natural to keep birds in cages. They are meant to FLY.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
NeutralUsername
replied on November 14th, 2008
Active User, very eHealthy
Milan wrote:
Birch wrote:
Keeping animals as pets is imprisoning animals. That's a new one! Ha ha ha! Yes, we should let all our dogs and cats free to roam the streets.
Sounds like a conspiracy from the people who run zoos giggle

If pets were roaming the streets most of them would be dead before the end of the week. I wonder if joeswife is going to clean up the mess? Wink


Where did she say that she advocates letting pets run free? Her actual comment implies people who buy animals to keep them as pets is imprisoning them.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
Milan
replied on November 14th, 2008
Experienced User
NeutralUsername wrote:
It doesn't sound like you are really against war.

Oh no, I am DEFINITELY against war. But once some bonehead starts one my main concern is for our troops to get home safely. Besides ending the war, that is all anyone can hope for.

Quote:
You do know that innocent people can die in wars, too, right?

Yep, that's one of the reasons why I'm against them. I'd much rather see bush and some other countries president just duke it out in the middle of the street. Instead of them starting a war, let them settle their differences that way, and leave to poor people out of the equation all together.

Quote:
If a person IS against ALL forms of human killing (born, unborn), just what is wrong with that?

Nothing really, much like it is your right to believe in Santa Claus. Neither one is realistic. Nuff said.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
Milan
replied on November 14th, 2008
Experienced User
joeswife79 wrote:
why is it that you care about babies that are minutes/hours old, but don't care about the ones living inside you?

Because they are different in MANY ways from one another. IF (and that's a BIG if) you were a real nurse, then you'd already know this.

Quote:
I told you I was a nurse because you claim I am uneducated

And I STILL believe that you are. Fact is you can become a nurse online. That does NOT make you educated regarding this topic, a fact that you have proven many times in this thread.

Quote:
How un-American of me to support my husband and care for our children while he has been deployed 4 times now.

So let me get this straight.... you are against all forms of homicide and believe that those that commit it should be punished. Your husband is trained by the government to commit homicide. You excuse him for committing homicide each day. Nope... no double standard there Rolling Eyes

Quote:
There is a BIG difference between killing someone that is trying to kill you and killing an innocent.

News Flash! MANY INNOCENT people are killed in wars!

Quote:

I have said my piece and am done. I won't be returning
Well obviously this was a lie. And speaking of lies, you do know that this IS the INTERNET and you can claim anything that you want - but that doesn't make it true. So while you claim that you're a nurse, or that you are married or that he is in the military, ect... you could actually just as easily be a 12 year old using daddies computer, right? One thing is for certain, your claims of being educated in this topic cannot be verified. You have yet to post one documented fact, and no, propaganda, rhetoric and half-truths from anti-choice websites don't count kiss
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
WhiteHairs
replied on November 14th, 2008
Experienced User
AyaMiyaki wrote:
nightangel73 wrote:
So let's try to kill your right now as an adult. You will do whatever you can to remain alive! And all your human instincts for survival will get activated. In the same fashion it is absurd to think babies don't want to be alive. This is a very poor argument.


You're missing the point. Phlem flat-out said that unborn babies would choose to be alive over abortion. Unborn babies are not capable of choice. They have no concept of "being alive" nor do they know what abortion is. They can not consider the two options and then choose one - they are not mentally capable of such a feat. They react purely on instinct, not on concious choice.

I don't think unborn babies even know what being alive is, which is why I don't think they want to be alive. They don't want to NOT be alive either - I'm not saying that - but that they don't know "being alive" from "not being alive". They would react in a self-defensive manner simply because their instincts told them to, not because they had a concious thought that their life was in jeopardy. A born individual (such as myself), while still acting on a survival instinct, would be able to appreciate my situation and would be actively fighting to live rather than blindly following instincts. Can you see the difference?
adults can be killed without their being aware of that or having the opportunity to defend themselves. so their really isn't much of a difference if any at all.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
aochriss
replied on November 14th, 2008
Extremely eHealthy
joeswife79 wrote:
Please show me your source for your claim the majority are fetuses - from all sources I have been able to find they do not specify exactly. (Not that it matters anyway - once the egg has implanted itself it is a baby regardless of how old it is). This is the clearest one I have found (and it's from pro-abortion sources courtesy of The Alan Guttmacher Institute and Planned Parenthood's Family Planning Perspectives - you should like that).


Why women have abortions
1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).

At what gestational ages are abortions performed:
52% of all abortions occur before the 9th week of pregnancy, 25% happen between the 9th & 10th week, 12% happen between the 11th and 12th week, 6% happen between the 13th & 15th week, 4% happen between the 16th & 20th week, and 1% of all abortions (16,450/yr.) happen after the 20th week of pregnancy.

Likelihood of abortion:
An estimated 43% of all women will have at least 1 abortion by the time they are 45 years old. 47% of all abortions are performed on women who have had at least one previous abortion.

(by the way this is only in the U.S.)


Most women don't even find out they are pregnant until 6-8wks (missed period).


Most women have regular periods. An embryo would be 2 weeks old on the first day of a missed period. Ovulation and subsequent fertilization occur approximately 14 days into the menstrual period, hence the age of 2 weeks.


Quote:
and at 8 wks the embyo become a fetus. So, while (barely) the majority are aborted before 9wks - it does not divide that number to show how many are before the 8wk time frame.


In the eighth week of pregnancy an embryo is 6 weeks old, because pregnancy is counted from the first day of the last menstrual cycle preceeding pregnancy. In the ninth week an embryo is 7 weeks old. Both 6 and 7 week old zefs are EMBRYOS.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Quick Reply
Search