The "Frog Boiling" Strategy of the "pro-life" movement...

And acceptance of LIES, Fugazi......remember-

http://www.politicalforum.com/abortion/387008-frog-boiling-strategy-pro-life-movement.html

 

I dont ignore it-i just interpert it differently.

 

I was not justifying lying and dishonesty in general-just in the context of how its politically smart for groups to not be so open about their agendas.

 

Sam though you of course don't see it....what you are saying is essentially-

"I'm not justifying lying in general.....just saying that it's justified to lie if it's an agenda I support."

 

Yep, give Sam his credit though he is the only one to admit it.

 

you ignore it plain and simple. You like the majority of pro-lifers want all the "goodies" that come with personhood but ignore all the restrictions of that status.

You ignore the equal protection clause because it doesn't suit your agenda
You ignore consent laws because it doesn't suit your agenda
You ignore self-defence laws because it doesn't suit your agenda.

If not then show me legally how any of the above do not apply to abortion?

 

I dont ignore it-i just disagree with your interpertation of it.
You misenterpert consent law as it applies to the circumstances of abortion.
Self defense is irrelevant with regards to abortion, for reasons I said in the past.

 

Yes, but you have NOTHING to back up your reasons and Fugazi does/did/will do.

Right NOW, self defense doesn't have anything to do with abortion but if Anti-Choicers ever by some miracle get a fetus declared a human it will ....and it will give the pregnant woman the right to self-defense

 

Problem is I am not interpreting it, I am reporting it as it is.

Do I, how?

Your "reasons" have no basis in law.

 

And I disagree with the people who interpert it.

You dont understand the implications of abortion should totally change the standards of how it should be treated from a legal perspective, not just in the sense of legality, but in other ways (like gvt funding.) A person taking a risk and getting injured by breaking their leg shouldnt be denied treatment, because (a)-theyre not hurting an innocent child, and mainly (B)-I dont give a crap about a woman who complains about how she doesnt want to have a baby.

Its not the governments job to help a stupid selfish wench like that.

 

A "stupid selfish wench" should be PUNISHED...right , Sam?


Hey , why don't you ever give that proof that pregnancy doesn't harm women, I've been waiting

 

Youre misenterperting what Im saying. Im not saying my moral feelings should automatically make something illegal. read between the lines.

- - - Updated - - -

im not saying to be misoygnistic-i said it for dramatic effect.

 

Yet again you need reminding that I am not interpreting it, neither are others, it is there in black and white for any who wish to read it.

no what you don't understand is that the law does not work that way .. explain to me what part of equal protection you don't understand?

Stupid comment noted

 

Really, then please do put forward how it is being wrongly interpreted based on legal standings, otherwise you are in fact saying your moral feelings are dictating your assertions.

 

I said moral feelings should impact factors whihc influence certain gvt policies regarding it-not solely the legality.

 

nope, because then you have a form of mob rule, you seem to forget that moral opinions change, should all laws be changed to reflect the current moral majority?

 

Thank you for admitting you don't care about women. At least you are honest, abhorent as your hatred of women is.

Abortion is not harming an innocent child. If you disagree, prove it.

 

Where do you get your "moral feelings" ?

 

But its a very good cause. How else could lobbyists in Texas have passed certain laws, if they didnt lie and say they were motivated by safety and hygeine?

 

See how morals fluctuate. If "immoral" activity(lying) suits YOU , you deem it OK.

Why do you feel you should control other people's "morals" when you can't control your own?

 

No answer? Having a little trouble defending lack of morals?

 

why are you saying i have a lack of morals?

 

As usual, instead of reading the posts and answering the INCONVENIENT questions you grab the wrong end of the stick.

I NEVER said you have a lack of morals.


Here's another INCONVENIENT question you can't answer:
Why do you feel you should control other people's "morals" when you can't control your own?

 

Where do you get them?
Why would it be wrong to tell women they're not allowed to kill the human life within them? Why do you think the woman has any right to make this choice?