Another 3000 babies were killed today in the US

[bqknight]

On a board where disgusting comments are the norm, this still is the most disgusting that I’ve read.

When anti-life zealots must degrade and equate an unborn child to that of a cancerous tumor, it confirms that I am squarely on the correct side of this issue and history will confirm that years from now.

Utter insanity.

I think the funniest part is pro-choice people use science as the basis for their stance. Not one person I know thinks abortion isn’t a big deal. Not one person I know doesn’t think it’s massive decision to make and typically a hard one. However, it’s the women’s choice to choose.

Meanwhile, anti-abortion folks hyperbolize and name call to no end. They yell and shout down, use scare tactics and can be extremely militant. The same type of people that the conservatives on this board like to bash so much.

 

[bqknight]

By the way, don’t let the anti-life zealots try to lie to you. They love to make you think that most abortions are to save either life, or due to rape, or complications.

This is totally false

Almost all research on abortions in this country, including the below, estimate that 95-98% of abortions performed since 1973 have been for elective reasons. Mostly to avoid inconvience.

That means that of the estimated 54M children killed since abortion was made legal in 1973, 53M were for convenience/elective.

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html

I’m so glad you can Google and find stuff that fits your needs. That dude is an astronomer and space physicist. Not a medical doctor at all.

 

[btbones]

I think the funniest part is pro-choice people use science as the basis for their stance. Not one person I know thinks abortion isn’t a big deal. Not one person I know doesn’t think it’s massive decision to make and typically a hard one. However, it’s the women’s choice to choose.

Meanwhile, anti-abortion folks hyperbolize and name call to no end. They yell and shout down, use scare tactics and can be extremely militant. The same type of people that the conservatives on this board like to bash so much.

Did you happen to read what we are responding to ?

 

[UCFKnight85]

I’m so glad you can Google and find stuff that fits your needs. That dude is an astronomer and space physicist. Not a medical doctor at all.

Yawn

The Guttmacher Institute, the legal research arm of Planned Parenthood, even concluded that in 2014, just 1.2% of all abortions were due to rape, incest, or complications. And they’re probably going to the highest estimate possible given they are PP’s research extension.

It’s not even debatable that the overwhelming majority of abortions are for convenience.

 

[UCFKnight85]

I think the funniest part is pro-choice people use science as the basis for their stance. Not one person I know thinks abortion isn’t a big deal. Not one person I know doesn’t think it’s massive decision to make and typically a hard one. However, it’s the women’s choice to choose.

Meanwhile, anti-abortion folks hyperbolize and name call to no end. They yell and shout down, use scare tactics and can be extremely militant. The same type of people that the conservatives on this board like to bash so much.

Pointing out that that “lump of cells” you’re slaughtering is actually a human child is a “scare tactic”? Omg ....

 

[fried-chicken]

You are one of the most disgusting people I’ve ever had the misfortune of associating with .

Tell me why one human should be forced to life support another human against her will

 

[fried-chicken]

On a board where disgusting comments are the norm, this still is the most disgusting that I’ve read.

When anti-life zealots must degrade and equate an unborn child to that of a cancerous tumor, it confirms that I am squarely on the correct side of this issue and history will confirm that years from now.

Utter insanity.

Oh yeah, well as I said, at 9 weeks it's not a baby so I'm not worried if it gets shreaded vacuumed stepped on kicked or whatever other imagery disturbs you.

Until you can explain how you're comfortable with a woman being forced to put her life at additional risk against her will for a 9 week old blob I'm not concerned with it.

You want the blob to have rights? Fine well the woman still has the right to pass on being an incubator for another human. Deliver the 5 week old goo ball and let the doctors try to save it's life. It's asinine.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Tell me why one human should be forced to life support another human against her will

Oh, now it’s a “human”? I thought it was just a collection of cells? Basically a tumor?

At least you’ve regained a sliver of humanity and now at least admit that it’s a human child and not some parasitic legion or tumor. A small step towards redemption.

 

[fried-chicken]

Oh, now it’s a “human”? I thought it was just a collection of cells? Basically a tumor?

At least you’ve regained a sliver of humanity and now at least admit that it’s a human child and not some parasitic legion or tumor. A small step towards redemption.

I'm using your logic. I'm getting past the classification argument and getting into the logistics of forcing a woman to incubate a human against her will.

 

[bqknight]

Ireland voted today to overturn its abortion ban.

 

[UCFKnight85]

I'm using your logic. I'm getting past the classification argument and getting into the logistics of forcing a woman to incubate a human against her will.

Oh so now you’re using “incubate”. How cute. Since women are nothing more than lifeless incubators that end up pregnant through divine intervention. Like Mary.

I guess I’m nuts and feel like that human (as you’ve admitted) has rights and that’s kind of violated when the mother decides to scramble its brain, 90%+ of the time for matters of pure convenience.

What do you think of the children who ended up living after botched abortion attempts? Should they kill the child on the medical table?

 

[Crazyhole]

Oh yeah, well as I said, at 9 weeks it's not a baby so I'm not worried if it gets shreaded vacuumed stepped on kicked or whatever other imagery disturbs you.

Until you can explain how you're comfortable with a woman being forced to put her life at additional risk against her will for a 9 week old blob I'm not concerned with it.

You want the blob to have rights? Fine well the woman still has the right to pass on being an incubator for another human. Deliver the 5 week old goo ball and let the doctors try to save it's life. It's asinine.

Despite the fact that this is absolutely disgusting and I can't reconcile why you care about kids being shot and not about them being aborted, you're just moving the goal posts in any way to avoid admitting that its murder.

 

[fried-chicken]

Despite the fact that this is absolutely disgusting and I can't reconcile why you care about kids being shot and not about them being aborted, you're just moving the goal posts in any way to avoid admitting that its murder.

Kids being shot are kids
Kids being aborted are not kids

What's difficult here?

 

[Crazyhole]

Kids being shot are kids
Kids being aborted are not kids

What's difficult here?

They aren't a 1972 Buick or a couch. If you could give me an example of a fetus being anything other than a person then maybe you'll have a point. Until then, you're justifying the death of a person.

 

[bqknight]

They aren't a 1972 Buick or a couch. If you could give me an example of a fetus being anything other than a person then maybe you'll have a point. Until then, you're justifying the death of a person.

What he's saying is that a fetus isn't a person. It's a fundamental difference in the way pro-choice and anti-abortion think. That's why it's really not even worth arguing. It's a fundamental belief of people that most likely will never change.

 

[Crazyhole]

How convenient for the left that they can have their cake and eat it. If a man kills a pregnant woman, no problem with making that a double homicide. If a woman has her baby killed it's choice.

There are so many flaws with the pro-abortion movements arguments it's no wonder that the majority of Americans are pro-life. From a scientific perspective, their arguments continue to fail. From a moral perspective, they never even had a chance. From an economic perspective it's proven to be a drain. There's nothing left but to avoid and ignore just so long as we can still have muh abortion.

 

[Crazyhole]

What he's saying is that a fetus isn't a person. It's a fundamental difference in the way pro-choice and anti-abortion think. That's why it's really not even worth arguing. It's a fundamental belief of people that most likely will never change.

So when does a person begin to be a person and when do they cease to be one? A newborn is no less different than a person on their deathbed than a newborn is to a fetus. Just different stages of development.

 

[bqknight]

How convenient for the left that they can have their cake and eat it. If a man kills a pregnant woman, no problem with making that a double homicide. If a woman has her baby killed it's choice.

There are so many flaws with the pro-abortion movements arguments it's no wonder that the majority of Americans are pro-life. From a scientific perspective, their arguments continue to fail. From a moral perspective, they never even had a chance. From an economic perspective it's proven to be a drain. There's nothing left but to avoid and ignore just so long as we can still have muh abortion.

Actually, according to Gallup, American's are 49% Pro-Choice and 44% Pro-Life. In addition, only 18% of Americans think it should be completely illegal.

 

[bqknight]

So when does a person begin to be a person and when do they cease to be one? A newborn is no less different than a person on their deathbed than a newborn is to a fetus. Just different stages of development.

That's what's up to debate is the fundamental factor that splits the two groups. Pro-Choice doesn't agree with the statement a newborn is the same as a fetus. Again, I don't see the point in arguing. Your mind won't change, my mind won't change. It's too deep of a topic to really evolve your way of thinking once it's made.

 

[Ace of Knights]

@bqknight, why do you guys even respond to this troll bait? Just let the same 5-6 posters who dominate the cooler sit around and circle jerk in here. They’ve chased off anyone who disagrees with them, so just don’t bother.

 

[btbones]

@bqknight, why do you guys even respond to this troll bait? Just let the same 5-6 posters who dominate the cooler sit around and circle jerk in here. They’ve chased off anyone who disagrees with them, so just don’t bother.

You can’t be serious .

 

[UCFKnight85]

I see BQ ran from my question about what he’d prefer to do with the children who were born after failed abortion attempts.

They aren’t people right? Kill them on the spot then?

 

[jt_knight]

That's what's up to debate is the fundamental factor that splits the two groups. Pro-Choice doesn't agree with the statement a newborn is the same as a fetus. Again, I don't see the point in arguing. Your mind won't change, my mind won't change. It's too deep of a topic to really evolve your way of thinking once it's made.

And a newborn is not the same as a teenager or adult. But why do you use english (newborn) then resort to latin (fetus) when differentiating between humans at different stages of development? Whether you are speaking of an unborn human being or a newborn human being the subject is still a human being. The unborn human is the offspring (fetus) of the parent. Since the unborn is, at all stages human, what role do human rights play? Do you believe human rights are subject to stages of development? If so, can we decide to restrict human rights based on other traits? Who makes that decision?

I understand this is a difficult issue. There are well-intentioned people on both sides. You're not a bad or immoral person if you are pro-choice. In fact, I think most pro-choice advocates genuinely believe pro-choice is the most reasonable, moral, and compassionate position. Pro-life advocates feel the same way. If we can agree on that point then perhaps we can have a discussion that could be mutually edifying. If not, then I agree discussion is futile. No response is needed.

 

[UCFKnight85]

I see BQ ran from my question about what he’d prefer to do with the children who were born after failed abortion attempts.

They aren’t people right? Kill them on the spot then?

And sorry- I meant FC ran from the question

 

[chemmie]

Yawn

The Guttmacher Institute, the legal research arm of Planned Parenthood, even concluded that in 2014, just 1.2% of all abortions were due to rape, incest, or complications. And they’re probably going to the highest estimate possible given they are PP’s research extension.

So, what percentage of abortions happen at or after 20 weeks, which is the image you posted previously as you appealed to emotion?

The answer is 1%, also.

Only 9% of abortions happen after 14 weeks.

So, will you keep the tired story about killing babies, or will you actually read and understand the rest of the statistics from sites you reference? Will you keep appealing to emotion or will you believe settled science which determined long ago when abortions are ethically moral?

 

[Bob the Citronaut]

HOORAY!!! WE CAN MURDER BABIES NOW TOO!!!

 

[UCFKnight85]

HOORAY!!! WE CAN MURDER BABIES NOW TOO!!!

The unborn children of Ireland were protected for far too long. They had it coming.

Heres hoping these proud people slaughter at least a few thousand this week to make up for lost time

 

[Bob the Citronaut]

@bqknight, why do you guys even respond to this troll bait? Just let the same 5-6 posters who dominate the cooler sit around and circle jerk in here. They’ve chased off anyone who disagrees with them, so just don’t bother.

Lol. The TDS made people leave. I was staunchly against Trump during the primary. I called him all kinds of nasty names. The insanity from the left and never Trumpers changed me. TDS is a bipartisan disease. Until a cure is found there will be no civility in politics.

 

[fried-chicken]

Lol. The TDS made people leave. I was staunchly against Trump during the primary. I called him all kinds of nasty names. The insanity from the left and never Trumpers changed me. TDS is a bipartisan disease. Until a cure is found there will be no civility in politics.

No, Republican party became the Trump party and you fell in line because you never had any principles.

 

[fried-chicken]

And sorry- I meant FC ran from the question

This whole thread was started because you guys were getting dunked on hard on every issue so you went back to the classics. No other reason for it.

 

[KnighttimeJoe]

No, Republican party became the Trump party and you fell in line because you never had any principles.

Boob made his intentions clear when Trump became the obvious republican choice. I am going off my memory of it a few years back, so it might be a bit fuzzy. He said future Supreme Court nominations were important to him and pro life. From that standpoint, it’s fair to see how he proceeded.

It probably becomes even easier to see when the dems promoted a candidate who even many other dems couldn’t stand in Hillary. Now, I know you might add that there are reports out there that trump paid for an abortion to happen. If true, I am interested to see what other individuals would say about this based on their voting preferences for him on the abortion issue.

 

[UCFKnight85]

This whole thread was started because you guys were getting dunked on hard on every issue so you went back to the classics. No other reason for it.

I see you can’t answer the question

 

[fried-chicken]

I see you can’t answer the question

I am not obligated to go down your rabbit hole of specific outlandish scenarios to help you prove a point. I haven't said shit about rape or the mother being sick or the baby being doomed to not survive once its born in this thread. You have never faced anything like this and you're not equipped to have a genuine discussion.

 

[Crazyhole]

That's what's up to debate is the fundamental factor that splits the two groups. Pro-Choice doesn't agree with the statement a newborn is the same as a fetus. Again, I don't see the point in arguing. Your mind won't change, my mind won't change. It's too deep of a topic to really evolve your way of thinking once it's made.

It's not a fundamental factor in the debate though. Pro life advocates are generally in agreement about it, give or take a few days after conception. Pro abortion advocates have never placed any sort of date or timeline on it because they can't. When a child feels pain? When the child is viable outside the womb? After birth?

There's no debate that can affect anyone's opinion because one side is 100% based in politics. You could maybe convince me that it's ok to abort prior to the baby feeling pain or before the heart begins beating, but it can't come from any level of objective scientific evidence because the pro abortion crowd has none. That's why they renamed it pro-choice. It sounds harder to disagree with. They can't provide any evidence that it is good or helpful, so they rename it to make it harder to argue against at the simplest levels. As soon as any level of reason is drawn into the conversation it always leads to deflection, as we see from FC.

 

[bqknight]

There's no debate that can affect anyone's opinion because one side is 100% based in politics. You could maybe convince me that it's ok to abort prior to the baby feeling pain or before the heart begins beating, but it can't come from any level of objective scientific evidence because the pro abortion crowd has none. That's why they renamed it pro-choice.

That is false. My decision to be pro-choice has absolutely zero to do with politics. There is also plenty of science that says a fetus cannot feel pain. It varies as to when they may be able to.

 

[ucflee]

Ya’ll should have seen the confusion I saw at Chick-Fil-A today ...

The Bammer/Gaturd/Auburn SEC,SEC, SEC crowd didn’t know what to be more against... my UCF Natty shirt or all of the rainbow hat wearing pride folks getting a 10 pack of nuggets (the place was packed)

 

[UCFKnight85]

I am not obligated to go down your rabbit hole of specific outlandish scenarios to help you prove a point. I haven't said shit about rape or the mother being sick or the baby being doomed to not survive once its born in this thread. You have never faced anything like this and you're not equipped to have a genuine discussion.

None of that means a damn thing. You’ve contended, disgustingly, that unborn children aren’t even human- but rather something more akin to a parasitic tumor.

The fact that people are alive today because they lived as a child after a failed abortion attempt literally destroys that argument. I don’t know how an inhuman worthless sack of cells could survive and live outside the womb and develop into fully functional people. Do you?

 

[UCFKnight85]

That is false. My decision to be pro-choice has absolutely zero to do with politics. There is also plenty of science that says a fetus cannot feel pain. It varies as to when they may be able to.

Even the most ardent anti-life researchers admit that unborn children can feel pain by 26 weeks. Abortion is legal in many states at 26 weeks. What do you make of that?

 

[sk8knight]

I’m dead in the middle on this issue but I have to wonder, if pro-choice were such a strong argument, why is it framed as “women’s health” whenever they’re trying to get money from Congress? You’d think that the case could stand on its own merits without obfuscation.

 

[bqknight]

Even the most ardent anti-life researchers admit that unborn children can feel pain by 26 weeks. Abortion is legal in many states at 26 weeks. What do you make of that?

I’m personally fine with it being at 20/24 (6 months). I wouldn’t have an issue if the laws in those states were changed to that. As long as there is some clause for mother saving issues.

By that far in, the decision should have been made.