Joined: 02 May 2008 Posts: 354 Location: , United States
Thanks: 16
Thanked:2
Posted: 07-07-08 17:24pm
meblonde01
wrote:
Birch
wrote:
NeutralUsername
wrote:
No side is better than the
other.
Except that prochoice advocacy embraces a
empathetic philosophy leaving morality and
spirituality to the individual, as well as
respecting a woman's inherent intelligence
and leaving medical decisions to her as
well.
All things that which vehement prolife
advocates cannot lay claim. There are
many reasons to despise the prolife
philosophy, and that easily transfers over
to actual individuals who strongly adhere
to the philosophy and are outspoken
online. Especially when they take
photographs of women entering clinics,
post them online, threaten with harm,
claim that women who obtain abortions are
promiscuous, slander women, make
judgements and claims about their
character, use false propaganda to further
their cause, and often claim a spiritual
belief as superior to all
others.
Lets not put all pro-life people in the
same category based on some. Just like
one should not single out Pro-choice
people and put them into a category who
would abort a late term pregnancy. Or have
multiple abortions as a form of birth
control. Not all Pro-life people do the
radical thing that we hear of. Just like
not all Pro-choice people would do some
things other pro-choice people would do or
agree with.
Agreed!
Some people tend to only see the negative
parts of the oppostie side. Or are in
denial and want people to fit a stereotype
(There are people who refuse to believe
that I am an Atheist so they continue to
call me Christian). Extremists do stand
out more and that's unfortunate.
|
aochriss
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 30 Apr 2008 Posts: 709
Thanks: 93
Thanked:172
Posted: 07-12-08 01:48am
nightangel73
wrote:
diamondsz
wrote:
One side is better choice, no offense but
if you want to be pro-life please do so
but do not inflict your views on
others....... You made a choice to be
pro-life and remember that.
why should you care what I do with my
body, especially if you don't know me?
why should you own or control my body?
That is slavery!!!
You dont care about the kids that die but
you care about a fetus, its sickening and
disturbs me more, its like caring for a
ghost, its not here but it
is.
This is example of the mob mentality
described by
neutralusername
lol! How can a post by ONE person be an
example of a MOB?
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 4144 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 159
Thanked:16
Posted: 07-12-08 19:54pm
NeutralUsername
wrote:
meblonde01
wrote:
Birch
wrote:
NeutralUsername
wrote:
No side is better than the
other.
Except that prochoice advocacy embraces a
empathetic philosophy leaving morality and
spirituality to the individual, as well as
respecting a woman's inherent intelligence
and leaving medical decisions to her as
well.
All things that which vehement prolife
advocates cannot lay claim. There are
many reasons to despise the prolife
philosophy, and that easily transfers over
to actual individuals who strongly adhere
to the philosophy and are outspoken
online. Especially when they take
photographs of women entering clinics,
post them online, threaten with harm,
claim that women who obtain abortions are
promiscuous, slander women, make
judgements and claims about their
character, use false propaganda to further
their cause, and often claim a spiritual
belief as superior to all
others.
Lets not put all pro-life people in the
same category based on some. Just like
one should not single out Pro-choice
people and put them into a category who
would abort a late term pregnancy. Or have
multiple abortions as a form of birth
control. Not all Pro-life people do the
radical thing that we hear of. Just like
not all Pro-choice people would do some
things other pro-choice people would do or
agree with.
Agreed!
Some people tend to only see the negative
parts of the oppostie side. Or are in
denial and want people to fit a stereotype
(There are people who refuse to believe
that I am an Atheist so they continue to
call me Christian). Extremists do stand
out more and that's
unfortunate.
There are only negatives to be
seen on the prolife side, since the
refusal to embrace a philosophy of empathy
(et al as described above) are negative
characteristics of those tenets. Since
prolife advocates fight for a system of
legislating medical decisions based on
their morality, which they insist on
subjecting to society as a whole, there is
nothing positive to be seen there. Prolife
fights abortion rights; they are not
pro-support-during-unwanted-pregnancy, or
pro-adoption, they are prolife. Nothing
positive about it.
I didn't lump all prolife advocates
together in my previous post. I think
people are quick to skim and decide they
are hearing the tune they want to hear so
they can make a claim that's not true.
I gave specific examples of real prolife
extremists and their activities as an
explanation of my statement that there are
plenty of reasons to despise "actual
individuals who strongly adhere to the
philosophy and are outspoken online".
I know you are prolife, Marty, and I
certainly don't despise you. One day I
keep thinking you'll come back from the
Dark Side.
Except that prochoice advocacy embraces a
empathetic philosophy leaving morality and
spirituality to the individual, as well as
respecting a woman's inherent intelligence
and leaving medical decisions to her as
well.
All things that which vehement prolife
advocates cannot lay claim. There are
many reasons to despise the prolife
philosophy, and that easily transfers over
to actual individuals who strongly adhere
to the philosophy and are outspoken
online. Especially when they take
photographs of women entering clinics,
post them online, threaten with harm,
claim that women who obtain abortions are
promiscuous, slander women, make
judgements and claims about their
character, use false propaganda to further
their cause, and often claim a spiritual
belief as superior to all
others.
Lets not put all pro-life people in the
same category based on some. Just like
one should not single out Pro-choice
people and put them into a category who
would abort a late term pregnancy. Or have
multiple abortions as a form of birth
control. Not all Pro-life people do the
radical thing that we hear of. Just like
not all Pro-choice people would do some
things other pro-choice people would do or
agree with.
Agreed!
Some people tend to only see the negative
parts of the oppostie side. Or are in
denial and want people to fit a stereotype
(There are people who refuse to believe
that I am an Atheist so they continue to
call me Christian). Extremists do stand
out more and that's
unfortunate.
There are only negatives to be
seen on the prolife side, since the
refusal to embrace a philosophy of empathy
(et al as described above) are negative
characteristics of those tenets. Since
prolife advocates fight for a system of
legislating medical decisions based on
their morality, which they insist on
subjecting to society as a whole, there is
nothing positive to be seen there. Prolife
fights abortion rights; they are not
pro-support-during-unwanted-pregnancy, or
pro-adoption, they are prolife. Nothing
positive about it.
I didn't lump all prolife advocates
together in my previous post. I think
people are quick to skim and decide they
are hearing the tune they want to hear so
they can make a claim that's not true.
I gave specific examples of real prolife
extremists and their activities as an
explanation of my statement that there are
plenty of reasons to despise "actual
individuals who strongly adhere to the
philosophy and are outspoken online".
I know you are prolife, Marty, and I
certainly don't despise you. One day I
keep thinking you'll come back from the
Dark Side.
|
diamondsz
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 Posts: 3332 Location: , Candyland-Canada
Thanks: 98
Thanked:159
Posted: 07-17-08 16:35pm
aochriss
wrote:
nightangel73
wrote:
diamondsz
wrote:
One side is better choice, no offense but
if you want to be pro-life please do so
but do not inflict your views on
others....... You made a choice to be
pro-life and remember that.
why should you care what I do with my
body, especially if you don't know me?
why should you own or control my body?
That is slavery!!!
You dont care about the kids that die but
you care about a fetus, its sickening and
disturbs me more, its like caring for a
ghost, its not here but it
is.
This is example of the mob mentality
described by
neutralusername
lol! How can a post by ONE person be an
example of a
MOB?
Definatly not a mob
......................
I would surely like to know because you
dont see me shoving my opinions down
people throats who want babies...
If you want them great, if you dont great
but that is a choice......
So the baby is only a person
when he isn't completely dependent on one
person?
A baby is a person when he is no longer
part of another person's
body.
a person is
always a person untill death. and a person
is never a part of another persons body.
|
Moo
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 20 Feb 2006 Posts: 1066 Location: London
Thanks: 21
Thanked:111
Posted: 08-07-08 04:47am
Few
wrote:
a person is always a
person untill
death.
A z/e/f isn't a person
|
motherofhighspiritedones
Supporter
Joined: 16 May 2008 Posts: 725 Location: Silverdale, WA United States
Thanks: 115
Thanked:81
Posted: 08-07-08 05:27am
Few
wrote:
aochriss
wrote:
Rosierose
wrote:
So the baby is only a person
when he isn't completely dependent on one
person?
A baby is a person when he is no longer
part of another person's
body.
a person is
always a person untill death. and a person
is never a part of another persons
body.
LOL. A FETUS/ZYGOTE/EMBRYO is a part of
another person's body...attached to the
mother via the umbilical cord. The
placenta acts as a transfer station for
waste and nutrients. An unborn human
cannot exist without BEING ATTACHED to its
mother via the UMBILICAL CORD unless it is
born after the 25 week mark, where if it
is born that early it will require life
support to SUPPLEMENT what it would have
been given by its mother VIA THE UMBILICAL
CORD. And a person is NOT a person until
it is ONE, meaning individual of another.
Not dependent on another for oxygen, food
and waste transfer at the cellular level.
A fetus is not a PERSON. IT might be a
human, but until it takes its first
breath, it, by law, is not considered a
person or a being.
|
Users who thank motherofhighspiritedones for this post:
aochriss
aochriss
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 30 Apr 2008 Posts: 709
Thanks: 93
Thanked:172
Posted: 08-07-08 06:31am
Birch
wrote:
NeutralUsername
wrote:
No side is better than the
other.
Except that prochoice advocacy embraces a
empathetic philosophy leaving morality and
spirituality to the individual, as well as
respecting a woman's inherent intelligence
and leaving medical decisions to her as
well.
All things that which vehement prolife
advocates cannot lay claim. There are
many reasons to despise the prolife
philosophy, and that easily transfers over
to actual individuals who strongly adhere
to the philosophy and are outspoken
online. Especially when they take
photographs of women entering clinics,
post them online, threaten with harm,
claim that women who obtain abortions are
promiscuous, slander women, make
judgements and claims about their
character, use false propaganda to further
their cause, and often claim a spiritual
belief as superior to all
others.
This is beautiful.
|
aochriss
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 30 Apr 2008 Posts: 709
Thanks: 93
Thanked:172
Posted: 08-07-08 06:36am
Few
wrote:
aochriss
wrote:
Rosierose
wrote:
So the baby is only a person
when he isn't completely dependent on one
person?
A baby is a person when he is no longer
part of another person's
body.
a person is
always a person untill death. and a person
is never a part of another persons
body.
Technically all true.
(Because Few didn't say he was talking
about a zef here.)
|
motherofhighspiritedones
Supporter
Joined: 16 May 2008 Posts: 725 Location: Silverdale, WA United States
Thanks: 115
Thanked:81
Posted: 08-07-08 14:24pm
aochriss
wrote:
Few
wrote:
aochriss
wrote:
Rosierose
wrote:
So the baby is only a person
when he isn't completely dependent on one
person?
A baby is a person when he is no longer
part of another person's
body.
a person is
always a person untill death. and a person
is never a part of another persons
body.
Technically all true.
(Because Few didn't say he was talking
about a zef
here.)
True but if you look in the post about if
Prolifers had their way and PP vanished,
you would know that Few here, calls
prochoice people cannibals. Says that we
as prochoice, choose to abort our fetuses
so that we have an extra bit of money in
our pockets. Says we refuse to eat at
family resturants, we prefer gourmet. No
offense to you Aochriss, I just kinda
figured out what Few meant about the above
comment.
|
oopoopoop
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 18 Mar 2004 Posts: 1492 Location: ,
Thanks: 75
Thanked:5
Posted: 08-07-08 14:51pm
And people think that when I say, "I love
children, but I can never eat a whole one"
I'm just joking!
|
Few
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 06 Aug 2008 Posts: 143
Thanks: 2
Thanked:0
Posted: 08-07-08 15:58pm
motherofhighspiritedones
wrote:
Few
wrote:
aochriss
wrote:
Rosierose
wrote:
So the baby is only a person
when he isn't completely dependent on one
person?
A baby is a person when he is no longer
part of another person's
body.
a person is
always a person untill death. and a person
is never a part of another persons
body.
LOL. A FETUS/ZYGOTE/EMBRYO is a part of
another person's body...attached to the
mother via the umbilical cord. The
placenta acts as a transfer station for
waste and nutrients. An unborn human
cannot exist without BEING ATTACHED to its
mother via the UMBILICAL CORD unless it is
born after the 25 week mark, where if it
is born that early it will require life
support to SUPPLEMENT what it would have
been given by its mother VIA THE UMBILICAL
CORD. And a person is NOT a person until
it is ONE, meaning individual of another.
Not dependent on another for oxygen, food
and waste transfer at the cellular level.
A fetus is not a PERSON. IT might be a
human, but until it takes its first
breath, it, by law, is not considered a
person or a
being.
this is an abortion
debate. not a court of law funny man.
fetus zygote embryo
adult adolescent all merely terms for
certain levels of development of a human
being. to say a mother is pregnant with
her baby makes sense. to say an adolescent
is pregnant with an embryo makes sense. to
say a mother is pregnant with a fetus is
an insult to our intelligence. yes the
placenta is a part of the mothers body but
the placenta only exists during pregnancy.
the umblical chord which attatches the
baby to the placenta is a part of the baby
not the mother. the baby is in no way a
part of the mother. to say an unborn baby
is a part of its mother body is to say
that a person that sits in a submarine is
a part of that submarine.
|
motherofhighspiritedones
Supporter
Joined: 16 May 2008 Posts: 725 Location: Silverdale, WA United States
Thanks: 115
Thanked:81
Posted: 08-07-08 16:16pm
funny MAN? get your gender straight. Are
you that ignorant that you cannot read my
username, which clearly states that I am a
mother? You just made my point for me. A
fetus is not a PERSON (meaning it can
exist on its own as an INDIVIDUAL) until
it is born, no longer attached by its
umbilical cord, to its mother's placenta.
You said so yourself. The placenta only
exists during pregnancy. Therefore a z/e/f
CANNOT exist without being dependant on a
woman's body. But I am not going to waste
my words on someone who compares a fetus
to a piece of machinery. BTW, a person
sitting in a submarine is considered a
part of that submarine. Trust me I know.
DH is in the Navy.
|
Few
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 06 Aug 2008 Posts: 143
Thanks: 2
Thanked:0
Posted: 08-07-08 19:53pm
motherofhighspiritedones
wrote:
funny MAN? get your gender
straight. Are you that ignorant that you
cannot read my username, which clearly
states that I am a mother? You just made
my point for me. A fetus is not a PERSON
(meaning it can exist on its own as an
INDIVIDUAL) until it is born, no longer
attached by its umbilical cord, to its
mother's placenta. You said so yourself.
The placenta only exists during pregnancy.
Therefore a z/e/f CANNOT exist without
being dependant on a woman's body. But I
am not going to waste my words on someone
who compares a fetus to a piece of
machinery. BTW, a person sitting in a
submarine is considered a part of that
submarine. Trust me I know. DH is in the
Navy.
this isn't the
navy so could you expain to us mere
mortals how a person becomes a part of a
submarine or any other vessel for that
matter. and i was comparing the mother to
a machine and the baby as the person in
the machine. and what gives you the notion
that a person has to exist outside of its
mothers womb to qualify as a person. a
person is created and has a continuous
lifespan untill its death. your notion of
a person not being a person untill some
arbitrary point during its lifespan is
illogical to the point of absudity. your
way of thinking is very similar to the pre
civil war slave society that had the
arbitrary defintion of a persons skin
color as qualifying them to be actual
persons. you are merely making up
definitions that have no basis in reality
to justify the discrimination and
slaughter of unborn humans. and what
causes you to have so much hatred towards
men to be so offended if you are mistaken
for one?
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 4144 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 159
Thanked:16
Posted: 08-08-08 00:07am
Personal attacks are not acceptable on
this forum.
|
motherofhighspiritedones
Supporter
Joined: 16 May 2008 Posts: 725 Location: Silverdale, WA United States
Thanks: 115
Thanked:81
Posted: 08-08-08 03:27am
Can we either lock this thread or do
something else about it...it is getting
really nasty. I don't care much for
personal attacks.
|
Darkmoon
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 08 Dec 2007 Posts: 434 Location: ,
Thanks: 98
Thanked:55
Posted: 08-08-08 19:05pm
Few
wrote:
you are merely making up
definitions that have no basis in reality
to justify the discrimination and
slaughter of unborn
humans.
But discriminating against fully sentient,
born women is a-okay by you. Who cares
about the person taking all the risks that
can actually feel pain and fear, right?
You're not "prolife", you're "profetus".
|
Few
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 06 Aug 2008 Posts: 143
Thanks: 2
Thanked:0
Posted: 08-08-08 20:15pm
Darkmoon
wrote:
Few
wrote:
you are merely making up
definitions that have no basis in reality
to justify the discrimination and
slaughter of unborn
humans.
But discriminating against fully sentient,
born women is a-okay by you. Who cares
about the person taking all the risks that
can actually feel pain and fear, right?
You're not "prolife", you're
"profetus".
do you
hate all fetus and want to kill all fetus
or do you only hate the male fetus and
want to kill all male fetus?
|
Reptar
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 24 Oct 2007 Posts: 389
Thanks: 44
Thanked:13
Posted: 08-08-08 20:38pm
Only if they all turn out to be
women-haters like you
