Quote:
Originally Posted by jfrog
1. I never called you a hypocrite either specifically or generally YET!. I did lay some groundwork on what I would call hypocritical... EDIT: I think the problem was with my use of the word "you". I used it in the generic anyone reading this post sort of sense and not the specific "AreYouReady" sense. I should have probably used the word "one".
|
Ok. Yes using the word "one" would have been helpful in trying to decipher what you are trying to make a point on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfrog
2. I explained why bringing up situations such as rape pregnancies and possible life threatening pregnancies was more than deflecting the issue as you insist on calling it. It's important to bring those issues up to deal with the hypocrisy of pro-lifers who believe abortion can be allowed in some situations. Those pro-lifers make up the majority of pro-lifers in my experience.
3. Again, nothing was a personal attack against you. It was an explanation on why talking about those fringe issues such as rape pregnancies is important.
|
Ok, I overreacted and I apologize. Let's discuss the rape and incest issue.
Most true pro-lifers (including me) I know in my region do not agree that abortions are ok in cases such rape and incest. Perhaps elsewhere some call themselves pro-lifers but
truly believe it is ok in some cases. I specifically brought that up because it is the very excuse
pro-choicers use to counter pro-lifers stance that abortion is murder. It may be a fringe issue, yet it is the very issue pro-choicers here use whenever there is a discussion about abortion. Pro-choicers say it is cruel to force a woman to bear her rapist's baby. Yet, there are women who do bear the rapists baby and some even keep and love that baby, often at the harsh judgment of the Christian community who have no idea as to how that baby was conceived.
I have taken care of the offspring of a brother-sister incestuous relationship. The poor child had dwarf-like syndrome and brain damage. I do not know what has become of that child after he improved enough to be removed from the neonatal intensive care unit.
Many pro-choicers use the 'medical procedure' explanation to categorize all abortions as "reproductive health" for women, when I think that term is quite deceptive and quite frankly repugnant. Medical procedures in pregnancies and abortions are not the same thing in my professional opinion.
Pro-choicers say that if women do not have access to safe abortions, they will return to the back alley abortionists. HUH? They make a mistake by becoming pregnant, but choose to make another wrong to "fix" their first mistake either by physicians or a back alley abortionist? It just does not make sense to me.
But what does make sense to me is that many people believe that abortion exists because of eugenics. Planned Parenthood's founder was a big proponent for eugenics.
**Margaret Higgins Sanger (September 14, 1879 – September 6, 1966) was an American sex educator, nurse, and birth control activist. Sanger coined the term birth control, opened the first birth control clinic in the United States, and established Planned Parenthood. Sanger's efforts contributed to the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case which legalized contraception in the United States. Sanger is a frequent target of criticism by opponents of the legalization of abortion,
based primarily upon her racial views and support of eugenics, but she remains an iconic figure for the American reproductive rights movement.**
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger
Perhaps pro-choicers are unwittingly brainwashed into thinking it is ok to associate an unwanted pregnancy with "reproductive health"?
)
Hybrid Mode
