Anonymous wrote:I do find it weird that technology has helped so many premature babies to be viable and thrive, of the same gestation age or younger than fetuses can be excised via partial-birth abortion. Anyone else find that overlap uncomfortable?

Anonymous wrote:So we make an exception for the life of the mother. That position is entirely consistent with pro-life beliefs. It is a monumental rarity that the life of the child/fetus/zygote actually poses a risk to the mother. But even the Pope would agree that a mother is not required to risk her life in order to give birth.

But hey...the fact that millions of babies in this country have been aborted because a pregnancy is inconvenient, that is OK with you guys. Whatever.

Here's this too, an actual majority of those babies are racial minorities. So this great champion of the underclass, Planned Parenthood, has a program in place that disparately targets for death little Afican American and minority babies. Yeah, it is the conservatives that are racists.

I'm done talking with you. This is not a productive conversation for either of us. You can assume I'm afraid to engage you and you hear the "crickets". Its actually that it is boring.

Signed,
An Anti Choicer

Anonymous wrote:So we make an exception for the life of the mother. That position is entirely consistent with pro-life beliefs. It is a monumental rarity that the life of the child/fetus/zygote actually poses a risk to the mother. But even the Pope would agree that a mother is not required to risk her life in order to give birth.

But hey...the fact that millions of babies in this country have been aborted because a pregnancy is inconvenient, that is OK with you guys. Whatever.

Here's this too, an actual majority of those babies are racial minorities. So this great champion of the underclass, Planned Parenthood, has a program in place that disparately targets for death little Afican American and minority babies. Yeah, it is the conservatives that are racists.

I'm done talking with you. This is not a productive conversation for either of us. You can assume I'm afraid to engage you and you hear the "crickets". Its actually that it is boring.

Signed,
An Anti Choicer

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not being snarky, please re-read my post. To some, this particular issue actually is black and white. It is a moral absolute. That is my entire point. There are scores of political issues that do not lend itself to black and white, many shades of gray or nuanced positions are more appropriate.

The point of my post was not to re-hash the very worn out pro-life, pro-choice discussion. My point was to point out that calling people immature because you disagree with them is pretty stupid.

Your opening sentence about "black and white views not being hallmarks...", if you read Augstine, Aquinas, Aristotle and more than a few other giants of philosophy, you will see that being deeply thoughtful and having some views that are absolute, are not at all inconsistent. That was my point.

Again, tell us about a world in which abortion is illegal. I say "illegal" rather than "doesn't exist," because there is no such world in which abortion doesn't exist. There is increased infanticide, there is more preventable death of women. Abortion will always be.

You are discussing abortion legality. I'm discussing abortion morality. "Abortion will always be"...yeah I get that. So will greed, rape, vanity, theft, gluttony, murder, etc. I understand the world is not Utopian. Do we agree in a Utopian world there are zero abortions?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not being snarky, please re-read my post. To some, this particular issue actually is black and white. It is a moral absolute. That is my entire point. There are scores of political issues that do not lend itself to black and white, many shades of gray or nuanced positions are more appropriate.

The point of my post was not to re-hash the very worn out pro-life, pro-choice discussion. My point was to point out that calling people immature because you disagree with them is pretty stupid.

Your opening sentence about "black and white views not being hallmarks...", if you read Augstine, Aquinas, Aristotle and more than a few other giants of philosophy, you will see that being deeply thoughtful and having some views that are absolute, are not at all inconsistent. That was my point.

Again, tell us about a world in which abortion is illegal. I say "illegal" rather than "doesn't exist," because there is no such world in which abortion doesn't exist. There is increased infanticide, there is more preventable death of women. Abortion will always be.

Anonymous wrote:I'm not being snarky, please re-read my post. To some, this particular issue actually is black and white. It is a moral absolute. That is my entire point. There are scores of political issues that do not lend itself to black and white, many shades of gray or nuanced positions are more appropriate.

The point of my post was not to re-hash the very worn out pro-life, pro-choice discussion. My point was to point out that calling people immature because you disagree with them is pretty stupid.

Your opening sentence about "black and white views not being hallmarks...", if you read Augstine, Aquinas, Aristotle and more than a few other giants of philosophy, you will see that being deeply thoughtful and having some views that are absolute, are not at all inconsistent. That was my point.

Anonymous wrote:Black and white views are not the hallmark of "much thoughtful, considered philosophical thinking."

In another abortion thread right before the election, I laid out out a number of scenarios and asked anti-choicers what would happen should Roe v. Wade no longer be the law of the land. One example was if a woman had a miscarriage at home, where would she need to go to prove that it wasn't self-inflicted? You know what I got in response? Crickets.