Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Supreme court strikes down Louisiana law restricting abortions.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
    They have accomplices among progressives who shield them from both criminal prosecution and vigilantes.
    And, work hard to convince them it's NOT murder - it's only a surgical procedure to remove a mass of cells.
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
      Well, there's a whole abortion industry teaching them that it's only a clump of cells.
      Given that it's a "whole industry" doing this, you should be able to post three examples of that industry teaching women that "it's only a clump of cells".

      I mean, unless you're willing to concede that instead of "a whole abortion industry", you meant supporters of abortion...

      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
      And, you realize all this abortion industry stuff was started by a racist woman, yes?
      And an atheist to boot! I guess if you're going to poison the well, you might as well go whole-hog...

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
        Well, there's a whole abortion industry teaching them that it's only a clump of cells. Do we really need to go over all that AGAIN?
        And, you realize all this abortion industry stuff was started by a racist woman, yes?
        if you mean Margaret Sanger, she was against abortion
        "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

        There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Whateverman View Post
          Given that it's a "whole industry" doing this, you should be able to post three examples of that industry teaching women that "it's only a clump of cells".
          Well, here's the problem.
          Anything I post is obviously going to be from a pro-life source, which you'll dispute.
          Anything that Planned Parenthood puts out is going to be much less honest about what they actually teach.
          I know that our local Pregnancy Center hears this all the time, and I've personally heard it at least two dozen times when a young girl comes into the clinic trying to justify having an abortion.

          I mean, unless you're willing to concede that instead of "a whole abortion industry", you meant supporters of abortion...
          Nope - I'm talking about young women who have told me and others, having been to the "clinic", about their counseling there.

          And an atheist to boot! I guess if you're going to poison the well, you might as well go whole-hog...
          I didn't realize she was an atheist, but that makes total sense.

          It's indisputable, however, that Planned Parenthood was started by a vocal eugenics enthusiast.
          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
            if you mean Margaret Sanger, she was against abortion
            She has a very complicated history.
            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
              They have accomplices among progressives who shield them from both criminal prosecution and vigilantes.
              I'm against pro-life terrorism if that is what you mean by vigilantism. I prefer peaceful protests, and advocating our positions tirelessly.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                Originally posted by Whateverman View Post
                Given that it's a "whole industry" doing this, you should be able to post three examples of that industry teaching women that "it's only a clump of cells".
                Well, here's the problem.
                Anything I post is obviously going to be from a pro-life source, which you'll dispute.
                You don't have the first clue as to what I will or wont dispute :)

                The rest of your response makes it clear that you can't (or in any case wont) support your claim.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Whateverman View Post
                  You don't have the first clue as to what I will or wont dispute :)
                  Actually, I think I do - you've made quite a name for yourself here.

                  The rest of your response makes it clear that you can't (or in any case wont) support your claim.
                  I did, but as I already said, you'd dispute it!
                  The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
                    I'm against pro-life terrorism if that is what you mean by vigilantism. I prefer peaceful protests, and advocating our positions tirelessly.
                    The point I was making is that they make sure no action, legal or illegal, can be taken to stop them.
                    "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

                    There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
                      if you mean Margaret Sanger, she was against abortion
                      Did she actually mention abortion in her writings? I know her basic premise was eliminating "the inferiors" so "the superiors" could thrive and society would be better off, though she was very cloaked when it came to specific races, unlike many of her 20th century colleagues who argued the same thing but were much more overt about the "inferior races." I suspect there were some shrewd eugenicists that were much more careful about the language they used so as not to spook societal and political support, not unlike many liberals today who have cleverly managed to turn it into a "female equality" issue.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                        Originally posted by Whateverman View Post
                        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                        Originally posted by Whateverman View Post
                        Given that it's a "whole industry" doing this, you should be able to post three examples of that industry teaching women that "it's only a clump of cells".
                        Well, here's the problem.
                        Anything I post is obviously going to be from a pro-life source, which you'll dispute.
                        You don't have the first clue as to what I will or wont dispute :)
                        Actually, I think I do
                        Thinking played no part in your opinion.

                        You're welcome to support your claim, but it's clear by now that you'd rather change the subject. Indeed, that seems to be your shtick in general.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by seanD View Post
                          Did she actually mention abortion in her writings? I know her basic premise was eliminating "the inferiors" so "the superiors" could thrive and society would be better off, though she was very cloaked when it came to specific races, unlike many of her 20th century colleagues who argued the same thing but were much more overt about the "inferior races." I suspect there were some shrewd eugenicists that were much more careful about the language they used so as not to spook societal and political support, not unlike many liberals today who have cleverly managed to turn it into a "female equality" issue.
                          What I meant was, did she actually give a definitive opinion of support one way or the other. She seemed neutral about the subject.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by seanD View Post
                            What I meant was, did she actually give a definitive opinion of support one way or the other. She seemed neutral about the subject.
                            Yeah, I've been trying to prove or disprove her support for abortion, but she seems to be all over the map. Gloria Steinem even seems to indicate that Sanger said what she needed to say in order to advance her narrative.

                            As Gloria Steinem pointed out in a 1998 essay for TIME, Sanger’s embrace of the eugenics rhetoric may have been less a heartfelt belief than a political ploy to broaden birth control’s appeal. But even speaking the language of eugenics could be insidious. Steinem writes:
                            [Sanger] adopted the mainstream eugenics language of the day, partly as a tactic, since many eugenicists opposed birth control on the grounds that the educated would use it more. Though her own work was directed toward voluntary birth control and public health programs, her use of eugenics language probably helped justify sterilization abuse. Her misjudgments should cause us to wonder what parallel errors we are making now and to question any tactics that fail to embody the ends we hope to achieve.
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by seanD View Post
                              What I meant was, did she actually give a definitive opinion of support one way or the other. She seemed neutral about the subject.
                              Wikipedia says so but despite their age I'm having trouble finding searchable digital versions of the relevant texts.
                              "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

                              There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                                Yeah, I've been trying to prove or disprove her support for abortion, but she seems to be all over the map. Gloria Steinem even seems to indicate that Sanger said what she needed to say in order to advance her narrative.

                                As Gloria Steinem pointed out in a 1998 essay for TIME, Sanger’s embrace of the eugenics rhetoric may have been less a heartfelt belief than a political ploy to broaden birth control’s appeal. But even speaking the language of eugenics could be insidious. Steinem writes:
                                [Sanger] adopted the mainstream eugenics language of the day, partly as a tactic, since many eugenicists opposed birth control on the grounds that the educated would use it more. Though her own work was directed toward voluntary birth control and public health programs, her use of eugenics language probably helped justify sterilization abuse. Her misjudgments should cause us to wonder what parallel errors we are making now and to question any tactics that fail to embody the ends we hope to achieve.
                                There's no doubt she was an eugenicist but the idea that she supported abortion or wanted to exterminate black people doesn't seem to match what I've read of her writings.
                                "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

                                There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                171 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                409 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                383 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X