The Tragedy of the Unwanted Child: What Ancient Cultures Did Before Abortion

HawkPT

HR MVP
Dec 13, 2002
1,456
1,002
113
Sure.

Meanwhile, there's nowhere for people with ectopic pregnancies to go in some states...


If you actually believe that the people in the pro-life movement want to prevent women from accessing safe medical procedures to eliminate an ectopic pregnancy, then I don't know what to tell you. As it is, you likely know this already, which means that we're not even having an intellectually honest conversation here.
 

Joes Place

HR King
Aug 28, 2003
125,508
121,701
113
If you actually believe that the people in the pro-life movement want to prevent women from accessing safe medical procedures to eliminate an ectopic pregnancy, then I don't know what to tell you.

I don't know what you want to tell me, either.

Because that is EXACTLY what they are doing and HAVE DONE here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
36,409
22,030
113
"It's a tough situation. Maybe killing them would be easier." That's essentially what you're saying.

Pro-lifers give more per capita to the organizations that aid these children than the average adults in America. They also are tax-paying citizens whose money goes to government institutions and programs that aid these children. On average, more people should spend their money like pro-lifers. That would help ease some of the pain.

We'd also have a much greater number of tax payers if we hadn't aborted 63M+ children since 1973.
No. That's lazy thinking. Most do not believe human life begins at conception. We are pointing out that for those of you who do, you need to propose solutions to the issues that your POV will produce. You don't. You fall back on bogus claims about charity and then turn a blind eye.

Links to data supporting your assertions?
 

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
36,409
22,030
113
There's so many places I could go with this, but I'll just say this: I'm talking about Christians and pro-lifers, and you immediately went to the GOP.

Christians pay their fair share of the taxes (possibly more than the average American citizen) and give more to charities than the average citizen. There are many more ways to provide aid to people in need than government programs, and many times those organizations are much more efficient and effective than government programs. People should spend their money more like Christians/pro-lifers.

As far as the GOP, there is much there to be desired.
And they are not doing enough to make a dent in the current issue let alone the shit show that will occur with the measures they are supporting in many states.

You guys aren't concerned about solving the issues, just virtue signaling.
 

HawkPT

HR MVP
Dec 13, 2002
1,456
1,002
113
No. That's lazy thinking. Most do not believe human life begins at conception. We are pointing out that for those of you who do, you need to propose solutions to the issues that your POV will produce. You don't. You fall back on bogus claims about charity and then turn a blind eye.

Links to data supporting your assertions?
Here you go...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jake9CNN

HawkPT

HR MVP
Dec 13, 2002
1,456
1,002
113
And they are not doing enough to make a dent in the current issue let alone the shit show that will occur with the measures they are supporting in many states.

You guys aren't concerned about solving the issues, just virtue signaling.
Still better than killing babies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jake9CNN

notlongago

HR Heisman
Jul 28, 2012
5,188
2,533
113
How do you feel about all of the potential dumpster babies and other future abandoned children? Do you thinks it’s better to die after being born? It’s a horrible situation anyway you look at it, but it should still be an option to have an abortion.
Why are those the only 2 options?
 

HawkPT

HR MVP
Dec 13, 2002
1,456
1,002
113
Here you go...

And here's another...

More God, more giving. Less God, less giving.

You could have easily found this yourself.

You sound like you want to give other people's money to these programs. People of faith are already giving their money, which they see as a gift from God that they have the opportunity to steward, to help the less fortunate. It is getting worse over time, but that's because those who have a living faith are reducing in numbers over time.
 

MepoDawg#

HR Legend
Gold Member
Oct 29, 2012
16,068
18,114
113
Same thing
This act is BS and tiring. Move on. There are Christians in all parties, pro-lifers in all parties etc. People aren’t required to have the same beliefs as another person in a political party. People have their own opinions on what’s important to them and vote accordingly. This applies to both sides on here. You’re just perpetuating the partisan issue of all or nothing. I don’t know how many of you can argue over the same stupid things everyday. Same BS, different day.
 

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
36,409
22,030
113
Here you go...

And here's another...

More God, more giving. Less God, less giving.

You could have easily found this yourself.

You sound like you want to give other people's money to these programs. People of faith are already giving their money, which they see as a gift from God that they have the opportunity to steward, to help the less fortunate. It is getting worse over time, but that's because those who have a living faith are reducing in numbers over time.
Yeah - gotta fund the mega church somehow. :rolleyes:
 

HawkPT

HR MVP
Dec 13, 2002
1,456
1,002
113
Leftists love painting with really broad strokes. You are so out of touch with reality. You have no idea what the average, rural, religious voter values, which is the only reason Trump (who I dislike, by the way) won in 2016. The rarer experiences disprove the broader truths to most of you on here. It's all a confirmation bias echo chamber.

I give 40% of my money to the government, and I tithe another 10+%, which has helped many organizations live out missions that I cannot personally fulfill. Yet the issue to the Left is the Conservatives are all virtue signaling and won't put their money where their mouth is.

There's plenty of money to put a huge dent in this problem. It's priorities that we are lacking. And we'd have even more money if 63 million hadn't been eliminated before birth.
 
Last edited:

kcnole63

HR All-State
Jan 11, 2021
698
917
93
My son is black.

The argument that pro-lifers only care for the baby before it's born is so tired. There is no proof that this is true.

On the contrary, Christians, who are largely pro-life, are amongst the most charitable, and many adopt and foster these children. We have personally supported many organizations that care for the orphans in America and throughout the world, and our church and many of our friends do the same.
This is great to hear. More churches and individuals need to step up to the plate. BTW, my wife and I adopted a sibling group of 3 that we were fostering 30 years ago.
 
Mar 11, 2020
20,908
18,532
113
This act is BS and tiring. Move on. There are Christians in all parties, pro-lifers in all parties etc. People aren’t required to have the same beliefs as another person in a political party. People have their own opinions on what’s important to them and vote accordingly. This applies to both sides on here. You’re just perpetuating the partisan issue of all or nothing. I don’t know how many of you can argue over the same stupid things everyday. Same BS, different day.
It makes way more sense when you realize its really like 15 people all using different usernames.
 

globalhawk

HR Heisman
Dec 16, 2003
5,593
6,175
113
If you actually believe that the people in the pro-life movement want to prevent women from accessing safe medical procedures to eliminate an ectopic pregnancy, then I don't know what to tell you. As it is, you likely know this already, which means that we're not even having an intellectually honest conversation here.
It is already happening your moron.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk

claykenny

HR Legend
Gold Member
Feb 5, 2003
13,454
7,344
113
Colorado
If you actually believe that the people in the pro-life movement want to prevent women from accessing safe medical procedures to eliminate an ectopic pregnancy, then I don't know what to tell you. As it is, you likely know this already, which means that we're not even having an intellectually honest conversation here.

Well, they already are. Look at what’s happening in Missouri over the ambiguous wording in the trigger ban. As well as some states potentially making it illegal to discard unused embryos from IVF.

We still have 8 embryos frozen and are done having kids. Should I be forced to pay for storage of those forever (and my kids and their kids and so on and so forth in perpetuity since they can theoretically be frozen forever) or be forced to donate them to another couple for IVF? Have to live knowing that discarding a cluster of cells with zero cognitive capacity wasn’t in option so I had to allow potentially 8 of my children to actually be born with awareness into a situation I can’t control?

This entire argument revolves around when life begins. If you think it begins at conception, then miscarriage is murder by God. I don’t personally believe it begins until a fetus is capable of living off literal life support (the placenta) at around 20 weeks, albeit with significant human intervention. That’s also when brain development is at least suggestive of “consciousness”. A heartbeat doesn’t really indicate life because we can keep brain dead patients “alive” a long time with technology and their heart beats on. If you believe heartbeat is life, then it is murder to take a brain dead patient off life support.

Nobody can “prove” when life begins. You can have your opinion that it begins at conception, but that is not a consensus definition and trying to legislate off that definition is theocracy.
 

HawkPT

HR MVP
Dec 13, 2002
1,456
1,002
113
They're on the scent, boys. Someone has sounded the shofar, and the Lib wolves have come to attack and kill their prey. They will revel in their humanistic virtual victory once again tonight, my friends. We put up a good fight, fellow Conservatives, but alas we have been foiled again by our faulty arguments, tales of fairy gods which stood no chance against their superior intellect. I, for one, am llicking my wounds. Next time maybe.
 

RileyHawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2002
36,409
22,030
113
They're on the scent, boys. Someone has sounded the shofar, and the Lib wolves have come to attack and kill their prey. They will revel in their humanistic virtual victory once again tonight, my friends. We put up a good fight, fellow Conservatives, but alas we have been foiled again by our faulty arguments, tales of fairy gods which stood no chance against their superior intellect. I, for one, am llicking my wounds. Next time maybe.
Are you speaking in tongues now?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Joes Place

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
47,682
40,173
113
40
That's an ideal way to look at it but it ignores the reality of the stress women can be under with such unwanted pregnancies. Abstinence is also an ideal that ignores reality.

So essentially we have to let the irresponsible kill their babies because killing infants is better than making people face the consequences of irresponsibility?
 

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
47,682
40,173
113
40
Well, they already are. Look at what’s happening in Missouri over the ambiguous wording in the trigger ban. As well as some states potentially making it illegal to discard unused embryos from IVF.

We still have 8 embryos frozen and are done having kids. Should I be forced to pay for storage of those forever (and my kids and their kids and so on and so forth in perpetuity since they can theoretically be frozen forever) or be forced to donate them to another couple for IVF? Have to live knowing that discarding a cluster of cells with zero cognitive capacity wasn’t in option so I had to allow potentially 8 of my children to actually be born with awareness into a situation I can’t control?

This entire argument revolves around when life begins. If you think it begins at conception, then miscarriage is murder by God. I don’t personally believe it begins until a fetus is capable of living off literal life support (the placenta) at around 20 weeks, albeit with significant human intervention. That’s also when brain development is at least suggestive of “consciousness”. A heartbeat doesn’t really indicate life because we can keep brain dead patients “alive” a long time with technology and their heart beats on. If you believe heartbeat is life, then it is murder to take a brain dead patient off life support.

Nobody can “prove” when life begins. You can have your opinion that it begins at conception, but that is not a consensus definition and trying to legislate off that definition is theocracy.

People have always died off early.

That never gave us the reason to kill people.

I find it funny that you say "No one can prove where life begins" so in a sense your view is "kill them and ask questions later."

Pretty sick to be ok with killing something that might be a human being.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jake9CNN

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
47,682
40,173
113
40
Leftists love painting with really broad strokes. You are so out of touch with reality. You have no idea what the average, rural, religious voter values, which is the only reason Trump (who I dislike, by the way) won in 2016. The rarer experiences disprove the broader truths to most of you on here. It's all a confirmation bias echo chamber.

I give 40% of my money to the government, and I tithe another 10+%, which has helped many organizations live out missions that I cannot personally fulfill. Yet the issue to the Left is the Conservatives are all virtue signaling and won't put their money where their mouth is.

There's plenty of money to put a huge dent in this problem. It's priorities that we are lacking. And we'd have even more money if 63 million hadn't been eliminated before birth.

So you would support universal healthcare?

Listen I'm pro-life but I also agree with them. A culture of life requires a sacrifice and investment from the government beyond what charity can provide. People are still going bankrupt with medical debt and the like right now.

Some of it is indeed misplaced priorities. But there might be a cost increase for much of this as well. Because what we have isn't enough regardless of if you think you are personally paying enough or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk

Joes Place

HR King
Aug 28, 2003
125,508
121,701
113
So essentially we have to let the irresponsible kill their babies because killing infants is better than making people face the consequences of irresponsibility?

No, your position is that people can be denied access to birth control.
By "companies" that are apparently "Christian", even though companies cannot "believe" in any religion, whatsoever.

Yet they can select healthcare options they don't like and make sure people have to pay for them out of pocket, instead of having their insurance premiums cover them like everyone else.

Meanwhile, God, himself/herself, allows 75% of fertilized eggs to self-abort. Because either "every one is a life that is special", or he's using all those unused "babies" to arm up his army of Angels against Satan. Because he's omnipotent, except in that war against Satan, which is his kryptonite, or yellow Achilles heel against his Green Lantern ring....

I lose track of the inconsistencies the self-proclaimed "Christians" make on this issue, while they ignore the abortion formula that was printed in their own Holy Book...
 

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
47,682
40,173
113
40
No, your position is that people can be denied access to birth control.
By "companies" that are apparently "Christian", even though companies cannot "believe" in any religion, whatsoever.

Yet they can select healthcare options they don't like and make sure people have to pay for them out of pocket, instead of having their insurance premiums cover them like everyone else.

Meanwhile, God, himself/herself, allows 75% of fertilized eggs to self-abort. Because either "every one is a life that is special", or he's using all those unused "babies" to arm up his army of Angels against Satan. Because he's omnipotent, except in that war against Satan, which is his kryptonite, or yellow Achilles heel against his Green Lantern ring....

I lose track of the inconsistencies the self-proclaimed "Christians" make on this issue, while they ignore the abortion formula that was printed in their own Holy Book...

My view is that we should have universal healthcare that provides access to contraceptives as part of it's package. I'm not sure where you get that is my view that a company can deny birth control.

Quite frankly I don't even think companies denying birth control is a problem. It's cheaper than a person giving birth. Even in the Hobby Lobby case you are referencing, Hobby Lobby objected to a small number of methods of birth control out of over 20 that were required to be covered by the ACA. Interestingly enough the ACA requires tubal litigation among these covered but does not require vasectomies to be covered. Something I would love to have a court case about but can't because I lack standing as my insurance covered it anyways.


And again lots of people die young. That doesn't mean we should participate. Life and death of humans should when possible be a decision left entirely to God or nature and the only exceptions would be to protect innocent humans.
 

Joes Place

HR King
Aug 28, 2003
125,508
121,701
113
My view is that we should have universal healthcare that provides access to contraceptives as part of it's package. I'm not sure where you get that is my view that a company can deny birth control.
Then it's not your view, but it is the Conservative majority view.
And it's not "companies" being forced to provide birth control. It's companies preventing common insurers from providing it. Even though the actuarial calculations clearly demonstrate it is both fiscally and morally responsible to do so.
 

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
47,682
40,173
113
40
Then it's not your view, but it is the Conservative majority view.
And it's not "companies" being forced to provide birth control. It's companies preventing common insurers from providing it. Even though the actuarial calculations clearly demonstrate it is both fiscally and morally responsible to do so.

Again in the case you are talking about the company objected to like 3 types of birth control out of over 20 provided.

Is there a company that is preventing it's employees from receiving any birth control coverage?

Still the easiest solution is skip the middle man to universal health coverage which covers any FDA approved method of preventing conception both chemically and surgically. And the law on this should apply evenly to both men and women instead of explicitly writing men out like the affordable care act did.
 

Joes Place

HR King
Aug 28, 2003
125,508
121,701
113
Maybe. . . but at the same time it wasn't like these women couldn't get birth control either.

They couldn't if the preferred type was not available thru insurance, and they worked an hourly Hobby Lobby job that meant it was financially difficult for them.

REMEMBER - they are ALREADY paying insurance premiums. And having to search around to find it somewhere "free" costs money. Time = money.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: LetsGoHawks83