Jump to content
rippy38

The three positions on abortion.

Recommended Posts

1) "Pro Life"- The belief that the unborn in utero are sacred, and that any interference with the natural process of life is condemned and should not be tolerated regardless of the circumstances

 

2) "Pro Abortion"- The belief that the unborn in utero doesn't exist until the first breath, and that interference with the natural process of life is not only acceptable, but often encouraged, regardless of the circumstances.

 

3) "Pro Choice"- The vast gray area between the above positions. It's the category that the overwhelming majority falls into, whether they will admit it or not.

 

 

While personally I don't agree with abortion, I do support individual responsibility (freedom) for one's own actions. I also believe that both parents should have a say in what happens to their unborn child while in utero and beyond, circumstances considered.

 

I also feel that abortion should never be employed as a method of birth control or for the mere sake of convenience, but should remain a legal option in certain situations like rape (incestual or not) or when the health of the mother is a legitimate concern.

 

By definition I am "Pro Choice"... with the life of the unborn child to be considered first and foremost, and abortion to only be considered an "option" in the direst of situations.

 

Off my soapbox...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NeoConvict said:

Medically required pregnancy termination is not secondary birth control. 

Agreed.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, NeoConvict said:

Medically required pregnancy termination is not secondary birth control. 

I think he just said that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, rippy38 said:

1) "Pro Life"- The belief that the unborn in utero are sacred, and that any interference with the natural process of life is condemned and should not be tolerated regardless of the circumstances

 

2) "Pro Abortion"- The belief that the unborn in utero doesn't exist until the first breath, and that interference with the natural process of life is not only acceptable, but often encouraged, regardless of the circumstances.

 

3) "Pro Choice"- The vast gray area between the above positions. It's the category that the overwhelming majority falls into, whether they will admit it or not.

 

 

I disagree with how you define the "three positions" on abortion.  I would state it this way:

 

1.  Religious based position - The belief that the unborn in utero is sacred from the moment of conception, and that any interference with the natural process of life is condemned and should not be tolerated regardless of the circumstances.

 

2.  Broad Abortion Rights - takes the position that a fetus is not a human life until it is delivered from the womb and takes its first breath, and that terminating that life at any time prior to and even during delivery should be a legal option available to all women.

 

3.  Restricted Abortion Rights -  Regardless of religious and/or morality arguments, recognizes that a woman has an individual right which supersedes any rights of the developing embryo - fetus where there should be a window of opportunity for a pregnant woman to terminate her pregnancy.  However, at some point during the fetus' development, the fetus is recognized as a viable human life which has rights independent of the mother's.  As to where that "line in the sand" is, would be somewhat arbitrarily determined based on a combination of science and society's norms as to what constitutes a life which would be entitled to rights independent from the mother. 

 

I am honestly tired of the use of phrases like "pro-choice", "pro-abortion", "pro-life".  They say nothing and each are nothing more than each side's personal "spin" on this topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Terrorists just implemented Sharia Law down in Bammy, and the terrorists are old, inbred, raised on hate, white trash retards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aborting a viable unborn child is NEVER necessary for saving the life or health of the mother. THAT is a LIE!  Think about it for a second. The answer to protect the life or health of a mother whose viable unborn child is threatening it is TO DELVER THE CHILD AND QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE (C-SECTION) NOT TO PAUSE TO ABORT IT BECAUSE THAT TAKES MORE TIME. SO TO USE THAT AS AN EXCUSE TO ABORT A VIABLE UNBORN CHILD IS DISINGENUOUS AT BEST. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, personreal said:

I think he just said that.

He wrongly considers that position pro choice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Skans said:

I disagree with how you define the "three positions" on abortion.  I would state it this way:

 

1.  Religious based position - The belief that the unborn in utero is sacred from the moment of conception, and that any interference with the natural process of life is condemned and should not be tolerated regardless of the circumstances.

 

2.  Broad Abortion Rights - takes the position that a fetus is not a human life until it is delivered from the womb and takes its first breath, and that terminating that life at any time prior to and even during delivery should be a legal option available to all women.

 

3.  Restricted Abortion Rights -  Regardless of religious and/or morality arguments, recognizes that a woman has an individual right which supersedes any rights of the developing embryo - fetus where there should be a window of opportunity for a pregnant woman to terminate her pregnancy.  However, at some point during the fetus' development, the fetus is recognized as a viable human life which has rights independent of the mother's.  As to where that "line in the sand" is, would be somewhat arbitrarily determined based on a combination of science and society's norms as to what constitutes a life which would be entitled to rights independent from the mother. 

That's it... i was simply using the catchphrases most commonly used in the mainstream.

 

The vast gray area is still the vast gray area, and always will be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, fishhead said:

Terrorists just implemented Sharia Law down in Bammy, and the terrorists are old, inbred, raised on hate, white trash retards.

Welcome to the Teahad. We are going to go Alabamaquada on the whole country!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, NeoConvict said:

He wrongly considers that position pro choice. 

If a physician tells a mother that carrying the child to term might kill her, then she ultimately has to make the choice to abort or not.

 

She shouldn't be forced to take the chance, or to have the abortion either way.

 

That's "pro choice", anyway you slice it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Buffalo said:

Aborting a viable unborn child is NEVER necessary for saving the life or health of the mother. THAT is a LIE!  Think about it for a second. The answer to protect the life or health of a mother whose viable unborn child is threatening it is TO DELVER THE CHILD AND QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE (C-SECTION) NOT TO PAUSE TO ABORT IT BECAUSE THAT TAKES MORE TIME. SO TO USE THAT AS AN EXCUSE TO ABORT A VIABLE UNBORN CHILD IS DISINGENUOUS AT BEST. 

 

 

More redneck gibberish.  Are you inbreed?   Is your mother also your wife?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DennisTheMenace said:

 

More redneck gibberish.  Are you inbreed?   Is your mother also your wife?

Buffalo definitely fits in the "Pro Life" category.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, NeoConvict said:

He wrongly considers that position pro choice. 

Sort of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DennisTheMenace said:

 

More redneck gibberish.  Are you inbreed?   Is your mother also your wife?

More moonbat bullschit from an idiot that obviously lacks any knowledge of medicine or common sense.  That contention I stated comes from my medical doctor  Brother, butthead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, rippy38 said:

If a physician tells a mother that carrying the child to term might kill her, then she ultimately has to make the choice to abort or not.

 

She shouldn't be forced to take the chance, or to have the abortion either way.

 

That's "pro choice", anyway you slice it.

Choices made with a gun to your head aren't choices. Those abortions are justifiable homicide. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, NeoConvict said:

Welcome to the Teahad. We are going to go Alabamaquada on the whole country!!

Laughable!!!

 

a05879078409385bc4bb4f48b7bcc010.jpg

 

At least you admit you're a terrorist. Now, as a Patroitic American, I'm gonna hafta kill your dumbass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, fishhead said:

Laughable!!!

 

a05879078409385bc4bb4f48b7bcc010.jpg

 

At least you admit you're a terrorist. Now, as a Patroitic American, I'm gonna hafta kill your dumbass.

Yeeeeee had!!! I'm your Huckleberry, say when.😎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NeoConvict said:

Choices made with a gun to your head aren't choices. Those abortions are justifiable homicide. 

What gun?

 

The doctor tells the mother that carrying her baby to term may kill her, and she has a choice to make.

 

How is that holding a gun to her head?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DennisTheMenace said:

 

More redneck gibberish.  Are you inbreed?   Is your mother also your wife?

Yer Navy buddy maineman says you shouldn't be saying stuff like that.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3CBF518100000578-4183034-image-a-20_1486

3 minutes ago, Buffalo said:

That contention I stated comes from my medical doctor 

This guy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rippy38 said:

Buffalo definitely fits in the "Pro Life" category.

No I do NOT> If a woman wants an abortion she should have it BEFORE viability whether for health reasons or no reason at all. After viability the rights, especially to life of the child has to be or should be considered. Goddamn, what is so fv(kin9 hard to figure out about that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, personreal said:

Yer Navy buddy maineman says you shouldn't be saying stuff like that.  

 

 

LOL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rippy38 said:

What gun?

 

The doctor tells the mother that carrying her baby to term may kill her, and she has a choice to make.

 

How is that holding a gun to her head?

 

 

Yes...a couple of years ago a mother knew she would die if she gave birth...she chose her baby's life over her own.

 

This is a true story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...