Conservatives

[Rule]

*rolls eyes*, the terms "pro-choice" and "pro-life" are just platitudes used to influence someone's opinion.  Just let it be "for the right to choose abortion," or better yet "for the right to choose abortion in certain cases," and "against abortion."

And Crazed, I'm sorry to break it to you, but a fertilized egg isn't exactly a child.  It's almost as close to being a born child as a sperm is: neither will become a developed baby through some mostly self-sustaining process.

[MyndFyre]

Classical liberalism, yes, not what liberalism today is.

Classical liberalism became conservativism, I don't know where today's liberalism & neo-conservativism have come from.
Classical liberalism/conservativism is the small government ideology, current liberalism is for the government trying to give people more chances & help in life.

Rubbish. You have been deceived by spin.

Unless it was my spin, I don't think he's been deceived.  He hit it fairly close to the mark.

And Crazed, I'm sorry to break it to you, but a fertilized egg isn't exactly a child.  It's almost as close to being a born child as a sperm is: neither will become a developed baby through some mostly self-sustaining process.

Let me put it this way:

If a woman does nothing (for example, she doesn't realize she's pregnant), and continues living her life as is normal, a child will develop and be born.

That will never happen with just a sperm.

So the two are incredibly distinct.  Your statement that "a fertilized egg isn't exactly a child" is really the matter of opinion that divides the two schools of thought.

[Invert]

Question: "Are you pro-choice or pro-life?"
Conservative: "Pro-life."
Question: "Do you support the death penalty?"
Conservative: "Yes."

Hypocrisy? I think so.

This just shows how backwards liberals are. Even though I am for woman's right to choose up to a certain point but here goes...

Conservatives:
Save the baby.
Kill the criminal.

Liberals:
Kill the baby.
Save the criminal.

In my opinion most of you have no idea what you are talking about and are blindfolded.

Liberalism is ruining my country. My country is no longer a republic but a neo-socialist state. Just like Rome it will crumble from within because of the inability to support its own weight. Corrupt and money hungry politicians are ready to sell this country out for a dollar and some already have done so. The feminization of men and the umbilical cord children that still live at home with mommy and daddy at age 30. The corruption of our education system and the lack of standards for teachers that do not provide quality education for the future generation. Americans grow dumber and dumber every day. Liberalism is like a Prozac to all these problems, it will all be gone when we realize what we gave done to ourselves.

[CrAz3D]

*rolls eyes*, the terms "pro-choice" and "pro-life" are just platitudes used to influence someone's opinion.  Just let it be "for the right to choose abortion," or better yet "for the right to choose abortion in certain cases," and "against abortion."

And Crazed, I'm sorry to break it to you, but a fertilized egg isn't exactly a child.  It's almost as close to being a born child as a sperm is: neither will become a developed baby through some mostly self-sustaining process.

uhm, then, since neither one is closer to being born than the other...how is it that alone that sperm will NEVER become a life & that the egg/sperm combo will most likely be born?

[Rule]

*rolls eyes*, the terms "pro-choice" and "pro-life" are just platitudes used to influence someone's opinion.  Just let it be "for the right to choose abortion," or better yet "for the right to choose abortion in certain cases," and "against abortion."

And Crazed, I'm sorry to break it to you, but a fertilized egg isn't exactly a child.  It's almost as close to being a born child as a sperm is: neither will become a developed baby through some mostly self-sustaining process.

uhm, then, since neither one is closer to being born than the other...how is it that alone that sperm will NEVER become a life & that the egg/sperm combo will most likely be born?

Uh... sometimes I really don't know why I bother with you.  I said that an egg/sperm combo will take a lot of intervention to be born, as will a sperm.

Further, wouldn't it make a lot more sense to consider the rights of something that "is born," rather than a chemical process that may lead to something that is possibly to be born?

Myndfyre: sex could be considered as much a part of ordinary life as eating.  kthanks.

[CrAz3D]

Myndfyre already corrected you in saying that the growth of the egg was natural, an intervention would interrupt the birth/growth of the egg.

If a woman does nothing (for example, she doesn't realize she's pregnant), and continues living her life as is normal, a child will develop and be born.

As I see it the woman has no right to choose whether or not to stop the birth of a child into this world.  Why should she be allowed to stop a life (unless there is some major other circumstance)?

[Rule]

Myndfyre already corrected you in saying that the growth of the egg was natural, an intervention would interrupt the birth/growth of the egg.

If a woman does nothing (for example, she doesn't realize she's pregnant), and continues living her life as is normal, a child will develop and be born.

For crying out loud... I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall.  I'm not going to bother after this, you're not worth it.

As I pointed out in my last post, is sex unnatural?  Ugh, just read the last post again.  Also, there are a lot of things the mother can do that will abort the fetus without intending to.  I think living life "as is normal," is a pretty big stretch.  Pregnant women are precluded from all sorts of "normal" activities. 

Hey, killing that algae over there could be interfering with a natural process that will lead to a more evolved species than ourselves.  Since when is interfering with nature "wrong"?   Is getting your tubes tied "wrong"?
Aside from that, I've pointed out repeatedly, we shouldn't be legislating on what a group of people think is "wrong", unless they are a distinct majority.

[AntiVirus]

Myndfyre already corrected you in saying that the growth of the egg was natural, an intervention would interrupt the birth/growth of the egg.

If a woman does nothing (for example, she doesn't realize she's pregnant), and continues living her life as is normal, a child will develop and be born.

Aside from that, I've pointed out repeatedly, we shouldn't be legislating on what a group of people think is "wrong", unless they are a distinct majority.

http://www.gargaro.com/plmajority.html.  I think that the majority of people are pro-life.

And Crazed, I'm sorry to break it to you, but a fertilized egg isn't exactly a child.  It's almost as close to being a born child as a sperm is: neither will become a developed baby through some mostly self-sustaining process.

You're close to correct in saying that a fertilized egg isn't exactly a child (if by child you mean a born human being), but it is considered to be living and has far more potential of becoming a child compared to a sperm.  This website; http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_fetu.htm, helps explain the stages of development of a fertilized egg that you should probably read, Rule.

Your statement, "It's almost as close to being a born child as a sperm is" is completely wrong.  It is far more developed and advanced and far closer to becoming a child than a sperm.  As I stated above, read the information provided by that website.  It might clear up a few things.

[CrAz3D]

Myndfyre already corrected you in saying that the growth of the egg was natural, an intervention would interrupt the birth/growth of the egg.

If a woman does nothing (for example, she doesn't realize she's pregnant), and continues living her life as is normal, a child will develop and be born.

For crying out loud... I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall.  I'm not going to bother after this, you're not worth it.

As I pointed out in my last post, is sex unnatural?  Ugh, just read the last post again.  Also, there are a lot of things the mother can do that will abort the fetus without intending to.  I think living life "as is normal," is a pretty big stretch.  Pregnant women are precluded from all sorts of "normal" activities. 

Hey, killing that algae over there could be interfering with a natural process that will lead to a more evolved species than ourselves.  Since when is interfering with nature "wrong"?   Is getting your tubes tied "wrong"?
Aside from that, I've pointed out repeatedly, we shouldn't be legislating on what a group of people think is "wrong", unless they are a distinct majority.

Yes the woman can do things that would have a miscarriage, but she hurts herself when she does that. 

Evolution isnt birth, eveolution takes millions of year to go from algae to human (if even possible), the baby is more likely than not.

I support abortion, but not because its the woman's right to choose (it isnt), and I dont believe in abortion because I think the kid should have a chance...but this world is full of stupid people that make it crap & dont take care of themselves & such...I dont want a kid have to experience feeling unwanted & such.


& thank you AntiVirus for bringing in more common sense.

[l2k-Shadow]

Question: "Are you pro-choice or pro-life?"
Conservative: "Pro-life."
Question: "Do you support the death penalty?"
Conservative: "Yes."

Hypocrisy? I think so.

This just shows how backwards liberals are. Even though I am for woman's right to choose up to a certain point but here goes...

Conservatives:
Save the baby.
Kill the criminal.

Liberals:
Kill the baby.
Save the criminal.

Again as every other ignorant conservative you are misunderstanding what pro-choice means. Scroll up:

See what most conservatives don't understand (and you see this a lot in pro-life rallyies) is that pro-choice does NOT mean pro-death. Pro-choice means letting the woman choose whether she is to carry out with the development of her child. If the woman, the family, whatever does not have the financial support to do this, is too young, whatever the case may be, abortion at least ensures that the child will not lead a miserable life and is likely to turn to drugs, thievery, commiting crimes.

Oh and liberals kill the innocent? Wait a minute, isn't there a thing called War in Iraq which takes innocent civilian lives every single day and the liberals strongly oppose it?

[MyndFyre]

See what most conservatives don't understand (and you see this a lot in pro-life rallyies) is that pro-choice does NOT mean pro-death. Pro-choice means letting the woman choose whether she is to carry out with the development of her child. If the woman, the family, whatever does not have the financial support to do this, is too young, whatever the case may be, abortion at least ensures that the child will not lead a miserable life and is likely to turn to drugs, thievery, commiting crimes.

Well, why don't we just abort *every* child to be absolutely sure that there are no children who will lead miserable lives, who will drugs, thievery, or other crime?  Because everyone has the capacity for it.

Pro-choice means that you're in support of someone who may choose to kill a baby.  Yes, you're not actually killing the baby.  But you're making it legal.

They'll come back to the belief that they can make people.....  better.  And I do not hold to that.

[l2k-Shadow]

link=topic=15102.msg153605#msg153605 I'date=1149190181]

See what most conservatives don't understand (and you see this a lot in pro-life rallyies) is that pro-choice does NOT mean pro-death. Pro-choice means letting the woman choose whether she is to carry out with the development of her child. If the woman, the family, whatever does not have the financial support to do this, is too young, whatever the case may be, abortion at least ensures that the child will not lead a miserable life and is likely to turn to drugs, thievery, commiting crimes.

Well, why don't we just abort *every* child to be absolutely sure that there are no children who will lead miserable lives, who will drugs, thievery, or other crime?  Because everyone has the capacity for it.

Pro-choice means that you're in support of someone who may choose to kill a baby.  Yes, you're not actually killing the baby.  But you're making it legal.

They'll come back to the belief that they can make people.....  better.  And I do not hold to that.

No let's not abort every child. I'm talking about people in poverty, children being born to teenage mothers, children who probably would not do well because of no money, that's at least how U.S. works, money will get you places. Sure everyone has the capacity to commit crimes but there are people who choose to not commit crimes, myself included.  And yeah, I'd rather make it legal to kill a child then make it illegal and see it suffer his/her whole life.

[Invert]

Question: "Are you pro-choice or pro-life?"
Conservative: "Pro-life."
Question: "Do you support the death penalty?"
Conservative: "Yes."

Hypocrisy? I think so.

This just shows how backwards liberals are. Even though I am for woman's right to choose up to a certain point but here goes...

Conservatives:
Save the baby.
Kill the criminal.

Liberals:
Kill the baby.
Save the criminal.

Again as every other ignorant conservative you are misunderstanding what pro-choice means. Scroll up:

See what most conservatives don't understand (and you see this a lot in pro-life rallyies) is that pro-choice does NOT mean pro-death. Pro-choice means letting the woman choose whether she is to carry out with the development of her child. If the woman, the family, whatever does not have the financial support to do this, is too young, whatever the case may be, abortion at least ensures that the child will not lead a miserable life and is likely to turn to drugs, thievery, commiting crimes.

Oh and liberals kill the innocent? Wait a minute, isn't there a thing called War in Iraq which takes innocent civilian lives every single day and the liberals strongly oppose it?

You are the one that is ignorant just like the rest of the morons that look at the label "pro-choice" and think it's anything other than an option to kill the fetus.

The only thing that "pro-choice" (or a more correct label for it would be "pro-death") introduces to the equation is the option of the annihilation of the fetus, it has nothing to do with the option for life since that is pre-existent without what you call "pro-choice".

This is just more proof how stupid liberals are and how they twist and spin things.

[Rule]

link=topic=15102.msg153605#msg153605 I'date=1149190181]

See what most conservatives don't understand (and you see this a lot in pro-life rallyies) is that pro-choice does NOT mean pro-death. Pro-choice means letting the woman choose whether she is to carry out with the development of her child. If the woman, the family, whatever does not have the financial support to do this, is too young, whatever the case may be, abortion at least ensures that the child will not lead a miserable life and is likely to turn to drugs, thievery, commiting crimes.

Well, why don't we just abort *every* child to be absolutely sure that there are no children who will lead miserable lives, who will drugs, thievery, or other crime?  Because everyone has the capacity for it.

Pro-choice means that you're in support of someone who may choose to kill a baby.  Yes, you're not actually killing the baby.  But you're making it legal.

They'll come back to the belief that they can make people.....  better.  And I do not hold to that.

No let's not abort every child. I'm talking about people in poverty, children being born to teenage mothers, children who probably would not do well because of no money, that's at least how U.S. works, money will get you places. Sure everyone has the capacity to commit crimes but there are people who choose to not commit crimes, myself included.  And yeah, I'd rather make it legal to kill a child then make it illegal and see it suffer his/her whole life.

Umm guys, why are we starting to refer to a fertilized egg as a child? Also, AntiTrust, your biased site suggests that about 51-60% of people approve of having the right to abort taken away.  That's not an overwhelming majority.  Further, your other site that is supposed to "educate me" (note, I have an advanced undergraduate background (2-3 years) in evolutionary biology, genetics, and biophysics), couldn't possibly be more biased.  It's almost funny.

Also, please, when you use the word "kill" use it when you are referring to life.  Can you explain why human life is more valuable than animal life. If it's a "moral sense" you have (seems ridiculous to me), then you must be in favour of legislation to take away people's rights when a questionable number of people feel that an action is immoral. 

Basically most of those who are "pro-life" want to legislate their instinctual, illogical, primitive, moral objections.  There isn't much reasoning behind the position, only the idea that "it's wrong" (and it's pretty arbitrary where people have decided to draw the line at "what is wrong").  If we're going to make laws that take away rights based on subjective (and arbitrary) moral opinions, I should hope that an overwhelming majority of people agree to it.


P.S. I think it's revealing that a thread with the word "conservatives" in it (as a joke) has turned into a liberal vs conservative thread which then turned into a fight over abortion.

[MyndFyre]

No let's not abort every child. I'm talking about people in poverty, children being born to teenage mothers, children who probably would not do well because of no money, that's at least how U.S. works, money will get you places. Sure everyone has the capacity to commit crimes but there are people who choose to not commit crimes, myself included.  And yeah, I'd rather make it legal to kill a child then make it illegal and see it suffer his/her whole life.

Who is anyone to decide whether someone else lives or dies?

At least with the death penalty, the person dying knows that (s)he's done something so grievous, that it has the potential for him to be put to death, and did it anyway.

An unborn child has made no such choice.