I think we are about to see a lot of abortion visuals from the pro-life crowd.

Tom Paris

HR Legend
Gold Member
Oct 1, 2001
42,486
45,551
113
So you don’t have any real evidence of parents not wanting their children. Got it.
Other than hearing it with my own two ears...especially a player of mine whose parents went to court because NEITHER wanted her...





I'll take your apology any time.
 

GarryO37

HR Heisman
Mar 31, 2013
6,460
4,350
113
Other than hearing it with my own two ears...especially a player of mine whose parents went to court because NEITHER wanted her...





I'll take your apology any time.

Lol. Buzzfeed? Great job hero. No apology required.

You still haven’t answered the question. How many? What percentage?

Just because you heard some kids saying it doesn’t make it true.

Do you have kids?
 

AuroraHawk

HR Heisman
Dec 18, 2004
6,128
7,848
113
Weird how you didn’t ask Bio for something on his “Make sure they are born then they can go f**k themselves” post. But are demanding proof of something that has actually happened in response.

You need to either pay more attention or quit ignoring shot when Dems do it. I’m tired of educating you every time I post about something that has already been in and out of the news and on here. Where do you think the term “infanticide” has been heard lately?

Here’s some nuggets…




The controversy has centered on a provision concerning third-trimester abortions. Under current Virginia law, in order for a patient to terminate a pregnancy in the third trimester, three doctors must certify that continuing the pregnancy would likely cause the patient’s death or “substantially and irremediably impair” her mental or physical health. The new bill would reduce the number of doctors to one, and remove the “substantially and irremediably” qualifier — abortions would be allowed in cases where a mother’s mental or physical health is threatened, even if the damage might not be irreversible.

The bill began inspiring outcry among abortion opponents nationwide after its sponsor, Virginia Delegate Kathy Tran, said in a committee hearing on Monday that it would technically allow abortion until the point of birth, if a doctor agreed it was necessary.

Gov. Northam, a Democrat, was asked about the bill in a radio interview on Wednesday, and his response only added to the controversy. Appearing to discuss what would happen if a child was born after a failed attempt at abortion, he said, “the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”


Some took Northam’s comments as an endorsement of infanticide. “In just a few years pro-abortion zealots went from ‘safe, legal, and rare’ to ‘keep the newborns comfortable while the doctor debates infanticide,” said Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) in a statement on Wednesday.
That proposed law sounds quite consistent with the Jewish faith's view of abortion. While I'll readily admit to not being a scholar on this issue and would welcome the viewpoint of those who may be better read on the topic, it is my understanding that the Jewish faith recognizes that a woman should be allowed to abort a pregnancy if it endangers her life or if giving birth would threaten her physical or mental well-being.

Might an argument be advanced that state laws barring abortion potentially impinge upon a sincerely held religious belief?
 

BioHawk

HR Legend
Sep 21, 2005
38,326
38,594
113
yes I understand this.
and who intended it to be separate? Man? Not sure what you mean by this?
Separation of church and state. Feel free to spout the BS that has been spun in recent years by evangelicals about how the founding fathers did not actually create a separation of church and state when in fact that was the entire point of the first amendment. I won't be reading that crap again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCHawk5
Dec 30, 2021
2,223
1,472
113
how the founding fathers did not actually create a separation of church and state
They did not, as evidenced by the prayer said before sessions of congress were called and the fact that the congress voted to supply bibles to grammar schools to help educate children. There are other examples of your folly as well.
when in fact that was the entire point of the first amendment.
No, it is not.
 

BioHawk

HR Legend
Sep 21, 2005
38,326
38,594
113
They did not, as evidenced by the prayer said before sessions of congress were called and the fact that the congress voted to supply bibles to grammar schools to help educate children. There are other examples of your folly as well.

No, it is not.
Sure, let's let the Russian propagandist tell us about the constitution.
 

the24fan

HR All-American
Jul 30, 2007
3,307
3,461
113
49
Separation of church and state. Feel free to spout the BS that has been spun in recent years by evangelicals about how the founding fathers did not actually create a separation of church and state when in fact that was the entire point of the first amendment. I won't be reading that crap again.
I do realize it was for a separation of church and state, problem is as you are aware most religion is in bed with politics, when in fact it should have nothing to do with it. Should be following Christ's example by refusing to get involved with the politics of his day. He realized his kingship would be in the future, another reason why he refused the Devil's offer of" all the kingdoms of the world and their glory".
 

3boysmom

HR Legend
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
16,048
32,036
113
Omaha, NE
www.chooseyouradventuretravels.com
wrong. I know you're using the most extreme circumstances to support your opinion, but in the MAJORITY of abortion cases are not in the category you are arguing. And once again there is the ADOPTION route. And whether a young girl has an abortion or puts an infant up for adoption both are going to be a traumatic life changing event...oh and adoption would allow someone to move on with their life as well as the child involved.
Did you know that BOTH parents have to sign off on adoption? I have actually had conversations with women in abusive relationships say that if they give birth he will not allow that child to be placed for adoption. He will use that child to keep her tied to him so she cannot get away. After, of course he coerced her into sex that she really didn't want to have. This is not an uncommon situation.
I would 100% prefer that abortion never happen. I would 100% prefer that there was never a child that was unwanted, abused, unloved. I would 100% prefer that no one had to endure a pregnancy complication or loss. If God allows all of those things and worse but then will damn a woman to hell for navigating it in the best way she knows how, then he isn't the loving and compassionate God he's purported to be.
But this is really about micromanaging women. Treating them as though they do not have the ability to make important decisions for themselves. Giving them a list of rules that they must follow and force them to ask permission before they can actually follow through with what they feel is best for their own lives.
 

the24fan

HR All-American
Jul 30, 2007
3,307
3,461
113
49
Did you know that BOTH parents have to sign off on adoption? I have actually had conversations with women in abusive relationships say that if they give birth he will not allow that child to be placed for adoption. He will use that child to keep her tied to him so she cannot get away. After, of course he coerced her into sex that she really didn't want to have. This is not an uncommon situation.
I would 100% prefer that abortion never happen. I would 100% prefer that there was never a child that was unwanted, abused, unloved. I would 100% prefer that no one had to endure a pregnancy complication or loss. If God allows all of those things and worse but then will damn a woman to hell for navigating it in the best way she knows how, then he isn't the loving and compassionate God he's purported to be.
But this is really about micromanaging women. Treating them as though they do not have the ability to make important decisions for themselves. Giving them a list of rules that they must follow and force them to ask permission before they can actually follow through with what they feel is best for their own lives.
I was not aware of the both parents having to sign off thing. Would I be wrong that in most cases a father who is not ready for the responsibility would probably have no problem signing off on that? Maybe I am being to optimistic?
My original point was in saying that if God sees an embryo as an individual, shouldn't our decisions be based on how he sees a matter?
I get it that things go wrong in pregnancy, however that shouldn't change our thinking. If we truly believe God is the rewarder of those seeking Him then we have to have faith that we will be rewarded for making the right decisions, even in difficult medical situations.
Of course you could argue if people were actually following God's moral standards then unwanted pregnancies wouldn't happen, no matter what form they take.
I get it that rape, incest, and the like happen and those are tragic, life altering situations, but again I'm guessing are in the minority of abortion cases? A tough spot to be as a mother but you cannot tell me that a rapist father, or the like would have any say in an adoption scenario?
Maybe my argument seems simplistic to many on here, but as someone who has a healthy respect of not wanting to disappoint my Creator, I am solid in my conviction of putting God's view point above a personal one.
I do understand the argument about God allowing suffering. That is certainly a valid point. However you might agree that just because God has allowed suffering temporarily doesn't mean that He is responsible for suffering?
The Bible acknowledges that the whole world lies in the power of the wicked one(1John 5:19). The world in general displays it's rulers wicked ways in many forms, including the violent, immoral, and selfish traits we see around us. Not only this but human imperfection thanks to our first parents disobeying their Creator, are responsible for sickness and death, which can be tied to pregnancies that go wrong due to medical issues.
The Bible actually teaches that God has taken steps to make sure that all the suffering that the human family are enduring right now will soon pass away. (Revelation 21:3,4)
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Tom Paris

fredjr82

HR Legend
Gold Member
Nov 13, 2007
22,742
12,506
113
so once again man has decided to put his moral laws and viewpoints above God's? FTR the inspired word of God makes it clear he views a fetus as a life.
Psalms 139:16-"Your eyes even saw me as an embryo; all its parts were written in your book. Regarding the days when they were formed, before any of them existed."
This SHOULD end the debate. Now I get it. there are those of you who don't believe in the existence of an intelligent Creator, however in that case I have one little word: ADOPTION.
Here is another brilliant observation....If you are unprepared to bring a child into the world, then either close your legs, or you better double up on the birth control. Sad that so many lives are lost due to a supposed adult not being able to control themselves or act responsibly.
I admit the choice would be difficult in situations of rape, or other medical issues, but in those cases a person would want to trust God and to believe they will be rewarded for following His standards.( again i get it, some out there don't believe in God. For those I suppose the issue becomes a bit more cloudy)

Nobody but the gullible and the weak believe this shit. Be responsible for your own actions. Don't use some imaginary being in the sky as justification for being an asshole.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom Paris

the24fan

HR All-American
Jul 30, 2007
3,307
3,461
113
49
Nobody but the gullible and the weak believe this shit. Be responsible for your own actions. Don't use some imaginary being in the sky as justification for being an asshole.
that's fine if you want to go that route. And in what way does my belief in God make me an a$$hole? Please explain.
 

IA_HAWKI

HR MVP
Dec 1, 2021
1,264
2,262
113
....If you are unprepared to bring a child into the world, then either close your legs, or you better double up on the birth control. Sad that so many lives are lost due to a supposed adult not being able to control themselves or act responsibly.
At this point, I agree. Women now should take matters into their own hand, take a stand and close up shop on their vaginas to any sexual attention from a male.

Even if you are in a committed relationship or married, but you do not want children….sorry no sex for your partner or husband.

start packing heat ladies, do not go out anywhere alone and start blasting away at anybody who tries to make sexual advances on you….you will get more respect from republicans taking a life the life of your husband who won’t take no for an answer with a gun than you will by terminating a pregancy you dont want.

I support any women who would go on a sex strike as a result of these laws and any woman who has to gun down any would be rapist who can’t take no for an answer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3boysmom

the24fan

HR All-American
Jul 30, 2007
3,307
3,461
113
49
At this point, I agree. Women now should take matters into their own hand, take a stand and close up shop on their vaginas to any sexual attention from a male.

Even if you are in a committed relationship or married, but you do not want children….sorry no sex for your partner or husband.

start packing heat ladies, do not go out anywhere alone and start blasting away at anybody who tries to make sexual advances on you….you will get more respect from republicans taking a life the life of your husband who won’t take no for an answer with a gun than you will by terminating a pregancy you dont want.

I support any women who would go on a sex strike as a result of these laws and any woman who has to gun down any would be rapist who can’t take no for an answer.
come on man, you're missing the point.
in the MAJORITY of abortion cases it is lack of personal responsibility. Not a whoops moment in a married or committed relationship. And no one is saying avoid any sexual advances lol, but if you're going that route take some PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY and use BIRTH CONTROL if you DO NOT WANT a pregnancy.
Good God what is so hard about taking some measures to ensure you are not in this position?
And no I'm not referring to the situations where rape or incest is involved. Completely different argument.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Tom Paris

IA_HAWKI

HR MVP
Dec 1, 2021
1,264
2,262
113
come on man, you're missing the point.
in the MAJORITY of abortion cases it is lack of personal responsibility. Not a whoops moment in a married or committed relationship. And no one is saying avoid any sexual advances lol, but if you're going that route take some PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY and use BIRTH CONTROL if you DO NOT WANT a pregnancy.
Good God what is so hard about taking some measures to ensure you are not in this position?
And no I'm not referring to the situations where rape or incest is involved. Completely different argument.
el oh friggen el. Don’t oull the “that’s different” shit just because it may affect guys from getting laid.

you cant be like “you need to close your legs” and when i say i agree….women need to take matters into their own hands to prevent getting pregnant even if you are married And don’t want a kid” and respond with “thats different”

ladies….you dont want a baby….do what you need to to not get pregnant. If that pisses your husbands/boyfriends/casual hookups/anybody you would normally consent to have sex with off….too damn bad. Law makers want to force you to give birth to a kid you don’t want, then maybe it’s time to not let any guy insert his dick into you.

Sorry if it inconveniences or sexually frustrates the guys. Use the remaining power you have, ladies!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom Paris

the24fan

HR All-American
Jul 30, 2007
3,307
3,461
113
49
el oh friggen el. Don’t oull the “that’s different” shit just because it may affect guys from getting laid.

you cant be like “you need to close your legs” and when i say i agree….women need to take matters into their own hands to prevent getting pregnant even if you are married And don’t want a kid” and respond with “thats different”

ladies….you dont want a baby….do what you need to to not get pregnant. If that pisses your husbands/boyfriends/casual hookups/anybody you would normally consent to have sex with off….too damn bad. Law makers want to force you to give birth to a kid you don’t want, then maybe it’s time to not let any guy insert his dick into you.

Sorry if it inconveniences or sexually frustrates the guys. Use the remaining power you have, ladies!
ok then...apparently we agree i think
 

IA_HAWKI

HR MVP
Dec 1, 2021
1,264
2,262
113
in the MAJORITY of abortion cases it is lack of personal responsibility.
and another big el oh el that you think forcing somebody who you feel has a lack of personal responsibility to be responsible enough to go through with a pregnancy and raise a child they didnt want…

I know, i know….adoption. Cool, we have increased the population if unwanted kids with nowhere for them to go, unless you and anybody else that screams “adoption” are lining up to bring these kids into your hone
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tom Paris

the24fan

HR All-American
Jul 30, 2007
3,307
3,461
113
49
whatever bud....and there are alot of responsible couples waiting to adopt. Look it becomes simple to me: if you don't have a problem killing people you are in favor of abortion. If you do then you are against it.
But if you are defending people having abortions because they don't think about the consequences of unprotected sex, then you're ignorant. In your argument there should be no consequences for your actions, just because you want to get laid? Now thats a major LOL
 

IA_HAWKI

HR MVP
Dec 1, 2021
1,264
2,262
113
whatever bud....and there are alot of responsible couples waiting to adopt. Look it becomes simple to me: if you don't have a problem killing people you are in favor of abortion. If you do then you are against it.
But if you are defending people having abortions because they don't think about the consequences of unprotected sex, then you're ignorant. In your argument there should be no consequences for your actions, just because you want to get laid? Now thats a major LOL
The people that are screaming adoption should be the very first people lining up to take these unwanted babies that you want women forced to bring into the world. Put your damn money where your mouth is. It is easy to scream adoption when you are sitting on the sidelines.

Since you consider a fetus a person, do you support women collecting child support on the little fetus? Let’s get a social security number set up, let the woman claim a child on taxes for the fetus and even take a life insurance policy out on it….you know, since it is a person. i also assume you don’t support the death penalty.

the only power women have left is to not allow men into their vagina. They need to flex that power
 
Last edited:

3boysmom

HR Legend
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
16,048
32,036
113
Omaha, NE
www.chooseyouradventuretravels.com
I was not aware of the both parents having to sign off thing. Would I be wrong that in most cases a father who is not ready for the responsibility would probably have no problem signing off on that? Maybe I am being to optimistic?
My original point was in saying that if God sees an embryo as an individual, shouldn't our decisions be based on how he sees a matter?
I get it that things go wrong in pregnancy, however that shouldn't change our thinking. If we truly believe God is the rewarder of those seeking Him then we have to have faith that we will be rewarded for making the right decisions, even in difficult medical situations.
Of course you could argue if people were actually following God's moral standards then unwanted pregnancies wouldn't happen, no matter what form they take.
I get it that rape, incest, and the like happen and those are tragic, life altering situations, but again I'm guessing are in the minority of abortion cases? A tough spot to be as a mother but you cannot tell me that a rapist father, or the like would have any say in an adoption scenario?
Maybe my argument seems simplistic to many on here, but as someone who has a healthy respect of not wanting to disappoint my Creator, I am solid in my conviction of putting God's view point above a personal one.
I do understand the argument about God allowing suffering. That is certainly a valid point. However you might agree that just because God has allowed suffering temporarily doesn't mean that He is responsible for suffering?
The Bible acknowledges that the whole world lies in the power of the wicked one(1John 5:19). The world in general displays it's rulers wicked ways in many forms, including the violent, immoral, and selfish traits we see around us. Not only this but human imperfection thanks to our first parents disobeying their Creator, are responsible for sickness and death, which can be tied to pregnancies that go wrong due to medical issues.
The Bible actually teaches that God has taken steps to make sure that all the suffering that the human family are enduring right now will soon pass away. (Revelation 21:3,4)
I know that it defies logic, but yes, rapists in some states have rights to the resulting child. As do abusers who have manipulated their partners into becoming pregnant as a way of controlling them. While it seems that adoption should be the easy and logical solution, it just isn't for everyone.

Are these scenarios the majority of abortion cases? No. But they are a portion of them. The vast majority are poor. They cannot afford another child. The majority are using birth control of some kind. Maybe not properly, but they are trying. And honestly, while I can respect your deeply held religious beliefs, one of the core tenets of this country is that you cannot force those beliefs on someone else. You are absolutely free to never have an abortion. You are free to hate abortion. You are free to pray that no one chooses abortion. But you are not free to force your religious views on others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: the24fan

the24fan

HR All-American
Jul 30, 2007
3,307
3,461
113
49
The people that are screaming adoption should be the very first people lining up to take these unwanted babies that you want women forced to bring into the world. Put your damn money where your mouth is. It is easy to scream adoption when you are sitting on the sidelines.

Since you consider a fetus a person, do you support women collecting child support on the little fetus? Let’s get a social security number set up, let the woman claim a child on taxes for the fetus and even take a life insurance policy out on it….you know, since it is a person. i also assume you don’t support the death penalty.

the only power women have left is to not allow men into their vagina. They need to flex that power

I know that it defies logic, but yes, rapists in some states have rights to the resulting child. As do abusers who have manipulated their partners into becoming pregnant as a way of controlling them. While it seems that adoption should be the easy and logical solution, it just isn't for everyone.

Are these scenarios the majority of abortion cases? No. But they are a portion of them. The vast majority are poor. They cannot afford another child. The majority are using birth control of some kind. Maybe not properly, but they are trying. And honestly, while I can respect your deeply held religious beliefs, one of the core tenets of this country is that you cannot force those beliefs on someone else. You are absolutely free to never have an abortion. You are free to hate abortion. You are free to pray that no one chooses abortion. But you are not free to force your religious views on others.
respect this and just so I am clear I'm not trying force my beliefs on anyone. But I agree with the points in your message
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3boysmom

claykenny

HR Legend
Gold Member
Feb 5, 2003
13,234
6,564
113
Colorado
In my career, I’ve seen gunshots to every part of the body (including a penis literally shot off to nothing). It’s terribly gruesome. The vast majority are suicide or accidents.

Ban guns?
 
  • Wow
Reactions: 3boysmom

KFsdisciple

HR Legend
Jul 3, 2003
10,359
1,005
113
I think they have to be federalized otherwise you face the problem Illinois faces. Their gun laws are tough, but they border a bunch of states where it's pretty darn easy to get a gun. So I read something like 2/3rds of the guns recovered from violent crimes in Chicago came from out of state.
so you're saying laws won't stop people from doing what they want? I can't imagine any of us ever speeding, or texting while driving, let a lone acquiring guns despite them being outlawed. Who knew people will continue to break the law no matter how many laws you have in place?
 

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
45,764
37,129
113
39
Said every socialist communist ever.

No a socialist would say we should seize the means of production.

Really wish you would stop conflating universal healthcare with socialism. It really just shows that you don't know what socialism is.

I havn't advocated the government taking over the means of production. Mostly because I think it's a terrible idea for the government to own the factories and the mines.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom Paris

Tom Paris

HR Legend
Gold Member
Oct 1, 2001
42,486
45,551
113
whatever bud....and there are alot of responsible couples waiting to adopt. Look it becomes simple to me: if you don't have a problem killing people you are in favor of abortion. If you do then you are against it.
But if you are defending people having abortions because they don't think about the consequences of unprotected sex, then you're ignorant. In your argument there should be no consequences for your actions, just because you want to get laid? Now thats a major LOL
A MILLION a YEAR????????? LMFAO.
 

Urohawk

HR Heisman
Sep 30, 2001
6,880
8,131
113
All you need is to show videos of the live birthing process to counteract that. My wife, "Don't you want to go and watch him being born." Me, "I can't unsee that."