Big Lies for Abortion >>MOD WARNING<<

MOD WARNING!!!

"It's a 'choice'."

No, it's a human life, destroyed by the very person in the world who is most responsible for its early health and well-being.
The child's father has no "choice" whether he will pay child support for 18 years, and have his own flesh and blood to have and to hold, or whether his child will be destroyed and sold off by Planned Parenthood for body parts.
The baby's four grandparents have no "choice" even if they are capable and eager to raise their grandchild.
Most important of all, the baby itself has no "choice." So the very word "choice" is a lie, a one-word oxymoron.

Many men are in prison for murdering their unborn child. Scott Peterson of California comes to mind. How is it that women can murder their unborn baby, but men will invariably be charged with its murder?

--------------

Norma McCorvey's lie
She was the "Roe" in Roe Versus Wade.
She lied through her teeth that she had been raped and needed an abortion.
Feminists don't care how many lies have been told and will continue to be told, so long as they can keep up the savage butchery,
even into the ninth month.

--------------

Planned Parenthood is called a "women's health organization."
In fact Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sanger for the purpose of eradicating blacks from the United States.
Sanger lectured at KKK rallies and is now a heroine of the left, of feminists everywhere.

Disgraceful racism is practiced by feminists and liberals. Deadly and disgraceful.

--------------------

C [___________________________________________________________________]FTB
---9 months---

The moment of conception, C, is at the left end. Full term birth FTB, is at the right end of the 9 month time line.
Now everyone agrees that you cannot murder a newly born baby, at the far right.
Moving back from that point of full term birth, one second at a time, draw a line where
you personally believe this life can be destroyed, for financial reasons, for convenience,
for any reason whatsoever. Draw a line at the spot where it must be spared in the second on
the right side, but can be murdered on the left side of the spot you selected.

Now try to justify the difference between those two seconds on either side.
_________________________________

"Before you were formed in the womb I knew you."

 

How many times have you been pregnant, OP?

 

Well, the next time you are pregnant you can choose as you wish.

Isn't America great?

 

Whether a person chooses to be responsible or not is not your call to make, neither is it the states call to make.
Firstly you spout out clear lies, PP have not sold any body parts, if you think differently please cite the cases where they have been prosecuted for this, secondly if you support the fathers right to have the child, then you must also support his choice NOT to have the child, same goes for the grand-parents, or is it more to the point you only want them to have the choice that suits your criteria?

As like most pro-lifers you don't have the first idea of what Unborn Victims of Violence laws are or do, primarily they are about consent, the person who kills the woman and her fetus are doing so without her consent, please cite ANY person who has been convicted of killing a fetus when the woman has consented to it's death.

Norma lied because it was the only way she could possible get a legal abortion in Texas, the Roe vs Wade case had nothing to do with that lie.

Your generalization (a fallacy) concerning feminists is duly noted and treated with the contempt is deserves.

All a complete load of bull crap.

Margaret Sanger founded a number of organisations which eventually merged to become Planned Parenthood in 1933, and while she was definitely a Eugenics supporter there absolutely no evidence to show she was racist, in fact there is a lot of evidence to show she abhorred racism. Abortion did not become part of PP's services until 1970 four years AFTER Sanger's death and throughout her life she was totally anti-abortion.

Sanger NEVER lectured at KKK rallies, she addressed the wifes etc of KKK members on birth control, again there is absolutely no evidence to show she spoke on anything other than birth control at these meetings.

Personally there should be no restrictions on abortion what so ever, in order to convince me otherwise you would have to show that a pregnant woman at 7 months or more would electively choose to abort. we already know it doesn't happen, one just has to look at Canada to show that fact.

your religiously affiliation has no bearing on anyone but yourself.

 

Post #8 is not my quote (system glitch)

 

Because it's irrelevant and pointless.

As it should be, you want access then pay for it.

Ignorance of abortion is the prime thing with pro-lifers, partial birth abortions have been illegal in the US since the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003.

Late term abortions are done for life threats to the female or fetal disability incompatible with life, and you know it.

So you want to be more racist by stopping black women from getting abortions on the same terms that white women do or is this nothing more than faux outrage.

wrong, it's five times not six and this is because the median income for black families is 20 times less then for white families - http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011...record-highs-between-whites-blacks-hispanics/

Except of course that Sanger was not racist, you ignorance doesn't change that reality, in fact she would have fitted perfectly into the pro-life ranks as she was 100% against elective abortion.

Tax payer funding only pays for abortions that are considered life or death for the female, rape, incest and fetal incompatibility with life . .elective abortions are NOT funded by the taxpayer as per the Hyde Agreement .. your ignorance of this subject is outstanding.

No doubt you will ignore all this because it highlights your ignorance.

 

Unborn babies don't have choices, just like every other lifeform other than humans, born or not, does not have a choice. They are not capable of making choices. They couldn't choose life just like they couldn't choose abortion. They remain silent on the issue so looking to them for guidance is rather silly.

And unnecessary. The mother is the individual in the equation, she is the one that has bodily rights recognized by society and the law. When the baby is born, it too becomes an individual. But like all things that proceed in a linear progression, you can't become an individual until you're actually an individual. One person. Indivisible.

I realize that this is all arbitrary. There are no objective guidelines here, no authority to appeal to for us to see if we're on the right track. We are making it up as we go according to what we believe just like humanity has done since it was capable of higher thought. Being pro-choice stems from the belief that a person, an individual, has rights over their body and everything within it. That includes whatever may be residing in a woman's uterus.

I don't expect you to agree with me. If we agreed, there wouldn't be need for debate.

But you do have to realize that no matter how impassioned you may become, no matter how high your noble steed may be, no matter how white the steel on your knight's armor is, you're on the same footing as the rest of us. You do not have the higher ground, moral or otherwise, you do not hold the default position of being right because you are Pro-Life(limitations and restrictions may apply to being pro-life, see fine print for details).

That is simply because somebody made a law that allows the court to charge a somebody with an additional crime when a fetus is harmed during the commission of their main crime, that being the assault or murder of the mother. This is not a defense of the position, it is simply illustrating that you know how laws work.

And in this case, sadly, this law exists exclusively to build a judicial challenge to Roe V. Wade. It's a tool, a stepping stone. And that's it. It does not grant personhood or recognize the fetus as an individual.

I don't support lying in court, but the results of this court case were as they should be in a society that wants to be free and just. It's sad that a court case was even necessary to cement a woman's right over her own body, even if looking back through history and the treatment of a woman's rights and autonomy, it comes as absolutely no surprise that it was.

Generally, you should stick to things that are relevant to the issue, but that was a great revision of history there and I'm sure the others who aren't aware of the truth will eat it right up.

But, I would feel remiss if I didn't mention one thing.

Margaret Sanger is dead. She's dead. She's been dead for over 50 years. She is no longer relevant to abortion or planned parenthood in 2016.

--------------------

There's no difference at all, because that entire timeline encompasses the time where the fetus is inside it's mother. Once it's not, we're no longer having a discussion about abortion. So, if things be as they should, we wouldn't be drawing lines at all.

However, since I know this is a democracy and in one of those, compromise is essential, I'm perfectly fine with reasonable cutoffs on elective abortions as long as they came with solid protections from both state and federal governments for a woman's right to choose and have access to abortion prior to the cutoffs.

Could you agree on a compromise such as that? Or will this question just be a springboard into a "all life is sacred and we shouldn't yada yada yada......" soliloquy?

 

Hillary Clinton proudly stated her admiration for the racist eugenicist, Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, which used over $600,000,000 of taxpayer money to perform abortions on women, any time, for any or no reason. See the savage butchery of abortions at http://abortionno.org

<MOD EDIT - REMOVED FLAMEBAIT>


Six Quotes Hint Why Marget Sanger Received "a dozen invitations" to speak at Ku Klux Klan Rallies

Margaret Sanger wrote about her Ku Klux Klan speech in her autobiography, "I accepted an invitation to talk to the women's branch of the Ku Klux Klan...I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses...I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak...In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered." (Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, P.366)

What did she say in her talk at the KKK Rally that led to twelve more invitations? Well, take a look at some of her past quotes:


1) "We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don't want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members."

Margaret Sanger's December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in Linda Gordon's Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America. New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976.

2) "Eugenic sterilization is an urgent need ... We must prevent multiplication of this bad stock."

Margaret Sanger, April 1933 Birth Control Review.

3) "Our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying ... demonstrates our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism ... [Philanthropists] encourage the healthier and more normal sections of the world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead weight of human waste. Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant ... We are paying for, and even submitting to, the dictates of an ever-increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all."

Margaret Sanger. The Pivot of Civilization, 1922. Chapter on "The Cruelty of Charity," pages 116, 122, and 189. Swarthmore College Library edition.

4) "The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."

Margaret Sanger (editor). The Woman Rebel, Volume I, Number 1. Reprinted in Woman and the New Race. New York: Brentanos Publishers, 1922.

5) "Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race."

Margaret Sanger. Woman, Morality, and Birth Control. New York: New York Publishing Company, 1922. Page 12.

6) "Eugenics is &#8230; the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems.Margaret Sanger. "

The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda." Birth Control Review, October 1921, page 5.

 

The biggest lie here is that you care about these precious humans. You don't. Your true intent is to appear righteous and nothing more. If you have opened up your home and have adopted unwanted children, I will admit to being wrong about you. Otherwise, it is just a facade.

 

And abortion is still legal and women can have one ( or a dozen) for any reason they want ...and you can't stop them


So your little Anti-Choicer talking points crap about Sanger didn't change a thing

 

to save time and trouble i'll just point you in the direction of the threads where all of the above have been answered and all the racist accusations concerning Sanger have been blown apart.

http://www.politicalforum.com/abortion/318502-pro-life-margaret-sanger-vs-reality.html
http://www.politicalforum.com/debates-contests/419581-margaret-sanger-racist-not.html

the reality is that everyone of the quotes you have given have been cherry picked, misrepresented and taken out of context, for example number 6, the actual quote is

"Today Eugenics is suggested by the most diverse minds as the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems.", your cherry picking of the quote misrepresents what it actually states.

 

come back when you have some actual facts to produce, so far its been bull (*)(*)(*)(*) and lies.

 

I'm a feminist. I also wouldn't have an abortion. I have two children.

But I only speak for me. Having actually given birth and being female and understanding what comes with pregnancy, childbirth and motherhood, I know that I have ZERO right to inflict my personal choices or belief systems on others. Other people get to make their own choices about how they live their lives. And I speak from the point of view of someone who actually has some perspective...as a male, you simply don't know what you're talking about.

What you can do, if this is a topic you care about is stop with the flaming nonsense. (Women do not get breast cancer from having abortions..that's just a load of donkey doo.) You can actually go out in your community and with with boys and inform them about having unprotected sex with women they aren't trying to have children with.

But otherwise, women's medical choices are simply none of your business. No pregnant woman gives a flying crap about your opinion.

 

If you had more than hate in you , you'd be able to answer questions and posts......


Spreading hate may end in mass shootings (murder) ....do you ever think about that before you post?

 

I spoke out in defense of unborn, helpless babies, and spoke truthfully - something you pro-abortionists NEVER do.
You call that "hate" because you play games with words, and the truth is not on your side. I cannot hope to answer all the questions and posts of all the vile people who lie to defend the savage butchery of innocent babies. Nor would it do me any good to answer them all. Your minds are made up and facts mean nothing to you. Nothing.

If abortion were allowed only during the first trimester, you would be livid. "Choice" as you call it would be preserved. The pain and suffering born by unborn babies more than five months in gestation would be eliminated. But you won't have that. THAT is a definition of "hate." You're full of it, not me.

 

Tell me, how do you feel about the "pain and suffering" babies endure during labour? Nobody seems a bit bothered by it.

That must be a lot worse than any pain or suffering they may endure while being aborted, yet every precaution is taken to ensure the foetus doesn't suffer pain during abortion.

Even when the liklihood of it being possible is virtually zilch.

 

Glad to say in Europe we do not have to take the crap from the religious nutters who would dictate to women, millions get "murdered" every year as you would put it, isn't democracy great no more sanctimonious crap from religion.

 

I call it hate because it's inflammatory and outright lying....all to stir others up against women.

That's what people did to stir up hate against gays and caused a mass shooting

You call women murderers.....that IS stirring up hate.......ARE YOU TRYING for shootings at clinics???????





You haven't posted any facts, just the usual bumper sticker crap.

You have not shown any proof of your accusations.

You have been shown to be totally wrong especially about Sanger.

You only had the usual "new to the abortion debate" ignorant claptrap sucked out of some Anti-Choice website...bet you've been in "Lifesite News"




It's quite dishonest to cherry pick posts....

You forgot this:

Spreading hate may end in mass shootings (murder) ....do you ever think about that before you post?

 

"""""Every evil begins with a lie,"""""""

...and you have posted so many.......

...every mass shooting or clinic shooting begins with lying and stirring up hate...



It's up to you to prove what pain if any the fetus feels and then show why that should affect a woman's choice to abort.....and you can't do that...see, your word just isn't enough