Abortion and Women's Rights

[DeistPaladin]

Trying to curtail my freedom...nice...

It's my freedom to say "shut up".

Whenever you whine about your arbitrary opinions that you want to force on women and run their lives for them and all you can offer as justification are your personal opinions, I can tell you to fuck off. You have no right to force your personal opinions on others.

I've repeatedly noted that I'm not doing anything to stop them, and that I only have a position, not an agenda.

Distinction without a difference.

Do you promise not to vote for politicians who will restrict abortion rights? If not, you're being dishonest once again.

It's interesting that you get so upset

Dishonesty does irk me, as do sanctimonious religious nuts who go around cramming their personal opinions down other people's throats.

[John V]

It's my freedom to say "shut up".

Whenever you whine about your arbitrary opinions that you want to force on women and run their lives for them and all you can offer as justification are your personal opinions, I can tell you to fuck off. You have no right to force your personal opinions on others.

I don't want to force my opinions on them. You, however, do. You would stop a woman from getting an abortion after 21 weeks, just because you arbitrarily see brain activity as more important than a heartbeat.

Dishonesty does irk me, as do sanctimonious religious nuts who go around cramming their personal opinions down other people's throats.

Hmmm...first you complain that I'm not answering questions...now I'm cramming my opinion down your throat.

[Rampant.A.I.]

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about the fact that I addressed humans v. animals separately from DNA, and prefaced the part about DNA with "Within humans." Therefore, it's pointless for you to note that we don't need DNA to separate animals from humans. You should go back and read the whole thread.

I love how AM will just shit out an argument, and then a few pages later will refer to it as a point "he already proved" when the last few pages were devoted to debunking his flawed argument.

[DeistPaladin]

I don't want to force my opinions on them.

Ah, so you're pro-choice then.

You do realize that's pro-choice, right?

Pro-choice isn't pro-abortion. Pro-choice can include what you claim is now your position, that you don't approve of abortion but you'll let a woman decide for herself.

Which contradicts your earlier posts that you would seek to ban all abortion, including in cases of rape, but would "allow" exceptions for rape as a means to an end of getting a total ban later. But hey, apparently you've evolved.

[John V]

Ah, so you're pro-choice then.

You do realize that's pro-choice, right?

Pro-choice isn't pro-abortion. Pro-choice can include what you claim is now your position, that you don't approve of abortion but you'll let a woman decide for herself.

Pragmatism is lost on you. By your definition, a person in the U.S. would need to break the law in order to be pro-life.

Which contradicts your earlier posts that you would seek to ban all abortion, including in cases of rape, but would "allow" exceptions for rape as a means to an end of getting a total ban later. But hey, apparently you've evolved.

And hypotheticals apparently confuse you too.

[LastPoet]

[DeistPaladin]

Pragmatism is lost on you. By your definition, a person in the U.S. would need to break the law in order to be pro-life.

OK, so we're 18 pages into this thread and no closer to understanding your position on abortion. This shouldn't be an essay question. Are you pro-choice or not?

[John V]

OK, so we're 18 pages into this thread and no closer to understanding your position on abortion. This shouldn't be an essay question. Are you pro-choice or not?

Pot-kettle and such. I received essays in response to the simple yes/no question, Are people who eat meat accessories to murder?

I am not pro-choice by most people's understanding of the term. I necessarily let women decide for themselves as that's been the law of the land for decades.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

OK, so we're 18 pages into this thread and no closer to understanding your position on abortion. This shouldn't be an essay question. Are you pro-choice or not?

Pot-kettle and such. I received essays in response to the simple yes/no question, Are people who eat meat accessories to murder?

I am not pro-choice by most people's understanding of the term. I necessarily let women decide for themselves as that's been the law of the land for decades.

Non-responsive.

[Losty]

OK, so we're 18 pages into this thread and no closer to understanding your position on abortion. This shouldn't be an essay question. Are you pro-choice or not?

Pot-kettle and such. I received essays in response to the simple yes/no question, Are people who eat meat accessories to murder?

I am not pro-choice by most people's understanding of the term. I necessarily let women decide for themselves as that's been the law of the land for decades.

Is this like being pro-life, but too ashamed to admit it? I don't get it. Pro-choice means you agree that women should have the right to choose. You would agree with laws that allow abortion and disagree with those that seek to prohibit it.

You can't really think pro-life means you go around tackling women to the ground and physically preventing them from having abortions. -_-