Abortion

Post Reply New Topic

No Islamic extremist has ever tried to kill me.
I live in the UK, have some moslem neighbours; no problems.
I couldn't care less about gas prices.
Guess i must be stupid.

edit: I don't think i am out of line calling Tha_Cat a patronising c**t.
Should post crap like that elsewhere.
Like the neo-nazis forum or something.

It is not as funny. You have to recognize that I designed the phrasing specifically to be against something that people value. People value life, people value choice. Abortion and fetus really don't draw to our beliefs and ideals as much as choice and life do and because of that saying "anti-abortion" is not negative.

I'm pro choice but I think if it was me, I'd have the baby. I mean, I don't think I could abort, emotionally speaking. But the choice must be there, that I believe.

no one ever try to kill you,there is more danger in americans who do the crime because of drugs and theft than "extremists" which by the way if you bomb them theyll react,the idea that they hate you because u are not their brother in belief or they hate your freedom its what your government have uploaded in your hard drive(brain) because u see everyone around you doing the same and u follow(it happens in all places). free yourself from them,dont fear muslims,if you help them they will become allies if you fight them they will fight back.
if for every bomb dropped in iraq was 10 plates of food,no american soldiers(more than 3000) would have died and no 650000 iraqis died either.

peace

Perhaps, too an extent because abortion has become more of a word (generally, of course) with a negative connotation. However, you would never see a political action group such as the Right to Life Committee call it self the Anti-Abortion Committee because "anti" is a political term no-no. This is because it means you are against something rather then for it. It's annoying, but then again if I was a political consultant and I was advising somebody...

This is all topic but...



Someone who flies a plane full of civilians into a building full of civilians is an extremist. There is no reason for quotation marks.



What would you have suggested would have been the appropriate response instead of the toppling of the Taliban and the eradication of much of al-Qaida in Afghanistan?



I don't know about The_Cat, who obviously disagrees with me strongly on abortion, but I don't care what Muslims believe. They can believe what they want, and I hope to live peacefully with them. Unfortunately there are Muslims (a frequently quoted mild estimate is 10%) that support violence. Here is but one of thousands of examples:



(source link)

Here is a link to Osama Bin Laden's fatwa against the United States (link)

Here is a link to the HAMAS charter (link).

Unfortunately these people exist. I wish they didn't.



I don't know about others but I don't get my information directly from the government and just follow it's marching orders. Most of my family have political opinions that are starkly different from my own, and I presume they mostly oppose the Iraq war. Look, I gotta be honest: polls show overwhelming disapproving over the handling of the conflict. That doesn't signal a people whose "freedom" was "uploaded" to their "brain."



Who? The U.S. government? Are you advocating the starting of a revolution or should I simply vote for the Democrats?



If these particular Muslims are nice people that condemn terrorist attacks like 9/11 and those conducted against civilians in Iraq and Israel then, sure, I don't fear them.



How do we help them (this is an honest question)?



This is a too vague ascertain. There are many Muslims, Shi'a and Sunni and there are even more sects within those groups (and I am no expert). We tried to helped stop the genocide against Muslims by Slobidan Molosivich. Would you define that as help? How about helping Kurdish Muslims defend themselves against Saddam Hussein's attempts to crush them? How about trying to stop terrorists who are murdering innocent civilians in Iraq? Do any of those examples qualify as "helping" Muslims, in your opinion?



In addition to combat operations, the US has engaged in humanitarian and rebuilding operations in Iraq. The Iraqi economy is in far better shape then before the Iraq war, and there is no serious hunger crisis in the country when before the war there was talk of hundreds of thousands of children dying yearly. This was perhaps exaggerated by likely at least partially true; this was due to deals by corrupt UN administrators that allowed the tyrant Saddam to trade oil deals for getting off with failing to keep up with feeding his people.



Perhaps. Although it is difficult to predict the exact course events had Iraq not been invaded. Eventually pressure would have been lifted, and perhaps sanctions too. Iran and Iraq very well might be engaged in a nuclear arms race at this moment. Regional changes such as the withdrawal of Syria from Lebanon may never have occurred, and the (now defunct) Orange and Rose revolutions of Ukraine and Georgia may never have happened.



This figure is inaccurate. Read more at http://iraqbodycount.net/press/pr14.phpIraq Body Count[/i]. Iraq Body Count has the civilian death toll (not those killed by U.S. forces) between 56,468 and 62,189. This is bad enough, but it is not 650,000. The United States does not target civilians in any way similar as to the way the Iraqi insurgencies do. The closet thing to "targeting civilians" is go after extremely high value targets such as the leaders of al-Qaida when they happened to be around civilians. This is nothing like bombing entire neighborhoods or cities as was once the case. Generally, the United States avoids targeting civilians at all. The practice of moving civilians out of their homes before (or even during sometimes) urban combat is required by the Geneva Convention which requires signatories to, if practical, attempt to remove civilians from the harm of the combat zone.

If you would like to continue on this, feel free to respond to this post in another topic if you want (since we are getting somewhat off-topic).

Actually, I feel that way about most social issues to be honest. I mean, my concern is not so much about the Islamic extremists, but rather on economic issues. If anything the economy affects the most people in our country and worldwide.

Herbert Hoover was a wonderful, and a talented man but he made one of the worst decisions in world history: He drastically increased the tariff. This not only led permanence to the Great Depression, it spread it worldwide and helped lead to the rise of...Adolf Hitler.

How sad that such a good man, a man who led relief efforts after both World Wars, would be scarred by such a legacy.

too much of a hoopla made of the destruction of a few cells of tissue.


the only real debate is with third trimester abortions....the rest is simple just christianity creating an issue where they see the opportunity to flex muscle.....show power....try to display that they are still relevant in today's society.

I am inclined to agree with you to a great extent. Hoover was a man with a bright future until the Great Depression and who from what I have heard did have a great regard for human freedom and welfare, and the increase in tariff did make things worse due to how we loaned money to Europe and our Great Depression really did not help the world. However, the massive mark left on the nation by the Great Depression is evidence enough of my claims without even looking at the politics or international dimension.

Definitely, Herbert Hoover was very talented and definitely sounds like a person I could respect given his broad experience and concern for individuals. The tariff was a very bad decision and a factor in the Great Depression and most certainly worsened the situation in Europe. Even if we ignore the political dilemma and possible pain that could have arisen from radicalism in the US and the international warfare aspect, the Great Depression can stand alone as a testament to how human welfare and economic welfare are so closely joined.

I do not agree. Claiming that your opposition is misguided is one thing, but attempting to argue that a political/humanitarian/philosophical position is guided merely by religious concerns (and this is not to say that like the abolitionists, many/most anti-abortion advocates are not driven partially due to religious concerns) are is a poor argument. It is similar to accusing someone of being a racist or homophobic to avoid discussing the issue at any depth.

Here are some non-Christian anti-abortion links:

Atheist and Agnostic Pro-Life League
Pagans for Life
Jews for Life

My only comment on the abortion issue is this:

If you're against abortion, don't have one.

"I encourage you to have as many as you want! In fact, I'm going to get a girl pregnant, then, purposely have an abortion."

i think there is a right choice and i think its prevention

If you're the one getting a girl pregnant, then you're not the one getting the abortion... unless you're a hermaphrodite, that is.

And yes, prevention is the best choice. But unfortunately, accidents happen nonetheless.

What I can't figure out is that many who oppose abortion also oppose things that would, if implemented properly, make abortions unnecessary... things like sex education and better access to (and proper education about) birth control.

I think abortion is bad, one reason being that once they find the gene for autism/AS and can test for it prenatally, then 90% of people on the autism spectrum will get aborted.

I'm against abortion. Unfortunately, I live in the US, which is a country founded on life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

It looks like liberty and the pursuit of happiness have higher priority these days.

I struggled long and hard to get off the fence when it came to allowing abortion. The key for me was knowing that a fetus is distintly human from the moment of conception. The DNA is nothing other than human once the egg and sperm meet. Human women do not carry houseplants, dogs, trees or other wildlife in their womb for nine months. It's quite simple, really.

The main reason a woman (and the father of the child) may be so afraid of pregnancy is that the fetus another person to be responsible for.