deep
Blue Crack Addict
Macfistowannabe said:Are we going to remove images from the Iraq war as well?
Are you bitching about the Administration now?
I thought you were a supporter?
Macfistowannabe said:Are we going to remove images from the Iraq war as well?
Images of the grotesque, if people want to see dead Iraqi children killed by US bombs then they can look at anti-war sites, if they want to see the damage wrought by Saddam then they can look at massgraves.info or any number of other sites.Macfistowannabe said:Are we going to remove images from the Iraq war as well?
Miggy D said:Why should a woman who can't choose to buy a condom be given the choice whether or not to end a human life? Why is it always the the least responsible people making the most important choices?
Macfistowannabe said:Are we going to remove images from the Iraq war as well?
Macfistowannabe said:That's your argument? Oh, man!
U2Kitten said:First, Irvine, you know that stupid 'anti-choice' shit pushes my anger button every time That's such bullshit, if you're against guns you're anti-choice, if you oppose smoking that's anti-choice, it's only one of many terms used to try to make a bad thing seem noble and good.
Irvine511 said:
well, i object to the "pro-life" label, since i like life as well.
however, if you go back and read, and i do this ONLY for you, i have consistently written "anti-choice/pro-life."
U2Kitten said:So, you admit you did it just to push my button and get me into the fight? If I misunderstood you, I'm sorry, but I still despise ALL the terms on BOTH sides and think they should be dumped in favor of just calling it what it really is- pro abortion and anti abortion, because that's what it comes down to, no matter how much you want to deny it. If you approve of the 'choice' of abortion, you are still in favor of abortion, aka, pro abortion, and again, if anyone is uncomfortable with that perhaps they need to reconsider their position.
Irvine511 said:
and, you should realize, that simply because you object to the terms of the debate that others don't necessarily agree with you.
Bono's American Wife said:If you think its necessary for people to see pictures like the one you posted last night, you could have posted a link with a disclaimer and at least given us a choice.
U2Kitten said:
Oh, I do realize that, that's why I have my rants, to try to show them how ridiculous it is to try to make themselves feel better about a very bad thing by using terms to sugar coat it and even make it appear noble. The 'anti-choice' one was invented just to try to make people who oppose abortion look bad, but it's not nearly as bad as supporting what abortion actually is, and it's hypocritical considering most pro abortion people want to take away guns, stop public smoking, and force me to wear seatbelts. Like I said, it's all so twisted I'd laugh, but I can't because it's too serious and sad.
Aww, go on and use your comfy wumfy widdle 'choice' terms if it makes you feel better, take away the scary ol' aborted fetus pic so you don't have to deal with the reality of what you support because that's not the way you 'choose' to think of it, or maybe someone can use photoshop to 'censor' that ugly wuggly ol' fetus pic with a fuzzy wuzzy widdle teddy bear or rubber ducky so you can all feel better! The baby isn't choppped up, isn't dead, the woman just had a choice! Smile!
Not only does using the terms to shield the horror of it annoy me, the very prospect that if it's a 'choice' it's okay bothers me too. What, so anything is okay as long as you want to do it? Everyone should be allowed to do anything they want? Rob a liquor store? Shoot your boss, hey, he's being an inconvenience to your life and causing you stress just like carrying that baby to term, can't we just 'terminate' him too so we can feel better? There are laws against doing bad things, and there is nothing more clearly and obviously wrong than the killing of a child. I have never heard of anything so bad being so fucking justified by so many since slavery and the genocide of the Native Americans in the 19th century. Historically, people will justify and rationalize anything if they want to do it anyway and not have to feel guilty.
Your argument was that pro-lifers want to punish women for having sex. It's about protecting innocent life, as 80s clarified for you. Blanketed? If I've done anything on here, it's uncovering the buzzword BS with what it really is. You don't go to a choice clinic to get a choice done. You go to an abortion clinic to stop a beating heart.Irvine511 said:dude. go back and read. i've offered an argument. you've offered blanket condemnations of caricatures of people who exist only at your convenient definition -- i.e., "liberals."
your post had no substance, just stereotypes.
War victims should be televised. Executions should be televised. Abortions should be televised. We have a right to know what our government is doing in regard to human life. I support that idea more than almost anything Bush supports.deep said:Are you bitching about the Administration now?
I thought you were a supporter?
Is anti-abortion too hard for you to say?Irvine511 said:
well, i object to the "pro-life" label, since i like life as well.
however, if you go back and read, and i do this ONLY for you, i have consistently written "anti-choice/pro-life."
Macfistowannabe said:Your argument was that pro-lifers want to punish women for having sex. It's about protecting innocent life, as 80s clarified for you. Blanketed? If I've done anything on here, it's uncovering the buzzword BS with what it really is. You don't go to a choice clinic to get a choice done. You go to an abortion clinic to stop a beating heart.
Macfistowannabe said:Is anti-abortion too hard for you to say?
As I've said many times, if the woman has maternal problems, that is an exception, as is incest or rape because she is not responsible for it. All women should have rights, but nobody - man or woman should have the right to end an innocent life unless it's their own. There aren't many liberals who actually believe that, which is a shame if you ask me. Also, I support the adoption of any loving parent - you included. As far as what the other side has to offer - it's "don't impose your morality on others..." Yeah, let's go back in time and tell that to Abraham Lincoln. After all, slavery was a "man's right" and you're anti-choice if you don't support it. When one life is at stake in order to appease another, I don't support it. I don't care if it's the death penalty (innocent people are executed, therefore I no longer support it) or abortion, innocent life should be protected. Of course, it's an accomplishment for the pro-choice crowd to acknowledge that there are in fact two involved here.Irvine511 said:i argued that one component of the anti-choice argument seems to be rooted in archaic notions of punishment for women who have sex (and notice men suffer no consequences). you might not agree, but your'e going to have to offer up more than hysterics. and if the above are the stark, black and white, simplistic terms you view the argument in, and you're unwilling to contenance what the other side has to say, then i suppose it's not really worth having a discussion. every single person who has posted on this thread has acknoweldged complexity in the abortion debate; you offered up a "liberals say this and do that" which had little to do with anything except divert attention from the actual issue itself. no woman walks into an abortion clinic and says, "yep, pregnant again doc; clean me out." it sounds like you wish that would happen, as it would give more creedence to your Coulterish comparisons of liberals as murderers (though, let me tell you, the girls i knew who had abortions in high school were wealthy, spoiled little things who drove SUVs and their daddies voted republican).
And anti-choice isn't?Irvine511 said:no. "anti-abortion" is too simplistic for me to give it any credibility.
Macfistowannabe said:And anti-choice isn't?
Look at it this way. I believe a woman has a choice whether or not to risk pregnancy. Therefore, labeling me "anti-choice" is rubbish.
If I were you and wanted to avoid getting too emotional, I might want to be careful with my choice of words. That's what I'm trying to convey.Irvine511 said:i'm also being very careful to keep this intellectual and hypothetical. this topic gets waaaaaaaay too emotional, and i'd rather have a discussion than the screaming matches that some in FYM are prone to on this subject.
Macfistowannabe said:If I were you and wanted to avoid getting too emotional, I might want to be careful with my choice of words. That's what I'm trying to convey.
dandy said:
once again, all the blame is placed at the doorstep of the woman. it's her fault for not buying a condom, her fault that her partner didn't/wouldn't wear one, etc. etc. it takes two to tango, and if no condom was used, remember that there was an equally complicit man who was also not using a condom.
the simple fact of the matter is that you can't stop people from having sex. it would be impossible to legislate and enforce, not to mention an unconstitutional encroachment on individual rights. this is how it is, and it's not going to change.
It took me a second to catch on...Miggy D said:Pro youth in asia. What's wrong with Chinese kids? I'm all for 'em!
Miggy D said:If the skin and muscle surrounding a woman's uterus became transluscent upon impregnation
-Migdilio