Written by LeChron James on 09.02.2009 at 21:46

Anyone that is pro-life and supports the death penalty needs to die. preferably right now.

What about those who are pro choice but against capital punishment?

Written by AiwiAstwihad on 10.02.2009 at 20:02

Written by LeChron James on 09.02.2009 at 21:46

Anyone that is pro-life and supports the death penalty needs to die. preferably right now.

What about those who are pro choice but against capital punishment?

true dat!

Quote:

After all, there's no difference between ending an innocent life that has not even lived it's first year...

So... are you saying that it hasn't even lived so it's not alive?

A life is a life.
For all you know that aborted unwanted baby could have grown up to become a murderer. But that's irrelevant.

So by murdering a murderer we continue the cycle of murder. That's not Pro-Life, I think is all LeChron was pointing out. He wasn't equating an innocent child with a death row inmate, just saying that if you value ALL "Life" (including ones that have yet to start and ones that are damaged) it is very hypocritical to support the "Death" penalty.

Maybe we just need new terms for opinions, Anti-Choice and Anti-Babies. xD

Written by Italics on 10.02.2009 at 19:50

I didn't criticize you, I criticized your self-contradictory post. Big difference.

And I explained myself within my own post.

You're acting as if aborting a child and putting a murderer to death are one and the same... and that to support one and not support the other makes no sense.
And so therefore I pointed out how nonsensical such a logic is.

So now maybe in order to defend your pride, you ought to explain to me why there is no difference between killing an unborn child and killing a murderer/rapist.

well i think ending a life is ending a life, regardless at the point of its conception or its point in life as a whole. death is death, no matter what age or circumstance.

Written by Introspekrieg on 10.02.2009 at 21:03

Quote:

After all, there's no difference between ending an innocent life that has not even lived it's first year...

So... are you saying that it hasn't even lived so it's not alive?

Wha? Huh? I'm saying it hasn't even gotten to live a year yet and therefore obviously hasn't even gotten a chance to do much in life. I don't know if that answers your question. Your question really didn't make any sense to be honest.

"for all you know that baby could also grow up to be a murderer....

WTF is that supposed to mean? You can't seriously be implying that the fact that a baby could grow up to be a bad person justifies killing it, can you? And if you're not, why even make such a stupid statement? It's going to be difficult for us to hold an intelligent debate if you're going to say things like that.

And you misunderstand what "pro-life" is about.
To be pro-life doesn't mean that "HEY! I SUPPORT LIFE NO MATTER WHAT!"
You want to know what I do when I see a spider? I squash the little f***er. With your faulty logic, I am no longer "pro-life" because I just killed an insect.
"Pro-life" is a term that isn't to be taken 100% literally. It is a title for people who are against aborting unborn children. If I believe that a mass murderer ought to be put to death rather than enjoy the luxuries of a prison (most inmates live a better life than people from third world countries!) and draining my tax dollars, this doesn't change the fact that I am "pro-life" on the subject of abortion.

Honestly, I don't mean to be so cruel about another person's opinions, but incredibly stupid posts like yours make it awfully hard to be respectful. It's like you made a wheel with a bunch of words on it, flicked a little spinner in the middle of it, wrote down whatever words the pointer landed on, and then put it together into a post.

Written by LeChron James on 10.02.2009 at 21:35


well i think ending a life is ending a life, regardless at the point of its conception or its point in life as a whole. death is death, no matter what age or circumstance.

Did you take this from a Miss America pageant or something?

That's beautiful and everything... but still doesn't improve the weight of your argument one bit. Sorry.
If you are still going to hold ending the life of an innocent child and ending the life of a murderer on the same grounds, than there is something seriously wrong with your head.

Written by Italics on 10.02.2009 at 22:33

Written by Introspekrieg on 10.02.2009 at 21:03

Quote:

After all, there's no difference between ending an innocent life that has not even lived it's first year...

So... are you saying that it hasn't even lived so it's not alive?

Wha? Huh? I'm saying it hasn't even gotten to live a year yet and therefore obviously hasn't even gotten a chance to do much in life. I don't know if that answers your question. Your question really didn't make any sense to be honest.

"for all you know that baby could also grow up to be a murderer....

WTF is that supposed to mean? You can't seriously be implying that the fact that a baby could grow up to be a bad person justifies killing it, can you? And if you're not, why even make such a stupid statement? It's going to be difficult for us to hold an intelligent debate if you're going to say things like that.

And you misunderstand what "pro-life" is about.
To be pro-life doesn't mean that "HEY! I SUPPORT LIFE NO MATTER WHAT!"
You want to know what I do when I see a spider? I squash the little f***er. With your faulty logic, I am no longer "pro-life" because I just killed an insect.
"Pro-life" is a term that isn't to be taken 100% literally. It is a title for people who are against aborting unborn children. If I believe that a mass murderer ought to be put to death rather than enjoy the luxuries of a prison (most inmates live a better life than people from third world countries!) and draining my tax dollars, this doesn't change the fact that I am "pro-life" on the subject of abortion.

Honestly, I don't mean to be so cruel about another person's opinions, but incredibly stupid posts like yours make it awfully hard to be respectful. It's like you made a wheel with a bunch of words on it, flicked a little spinner in the middle of it, wrote down whatever words the pointer landed on, and then put it together into a post.

Whoa! Calm down there slugger...

I think you left out a vital part of my quote:

Quote:
For all you know that aborted unwanted baby could have grown up to become a murderer. But that's irrelevant.

It was merely a hypothetical statement showing an intriguing circumstance where the baby and a death row murderer could be one in the same. Now you are saying statements are stupid because you obviously misunderstood, as I misunderstood your statement on a fetus being alive. For this I apologize.

My post was merely meant to defend the irony of LeChron James' qualm with the wording of "Pro-Life" instead of "Anti-Abortion", so again I am sorry if I offended you in any way.

God Bless

No offense taken

Okay, I see there are huge abortion protesters in here.
I'm not pro-life or pro-choice or anything. I'm just with common sense. First, since abortion is done within like 2 weeks or even a month, then you're technically killing a bunch of cells and that's it. It's only a zygote and not a human being. So it is NOT murder.
Second, most of the people doing abortions have been raped/had sex inconsiderably/were abused/are minors. So, most of them can't even provide a good life to the child they're pregnant with. Speak about adding to poverty.

Not may people agree with my views on this, but I believe that it's the woman's body, so she has the right to do what she wants. I would also agree with the potential father to be able to object to the procedure if he's willing to take the child after birth, but honestly, if a woman doesn't want to go through with the pregnancy, don't make her. I also believe they should raise the costs of the procedure significantly, to sort of deter the woman from having it happen again.

Written by [user id=39721] on 27.02.2009 at 23:41

Not may people agree with my views on this, but I believe that it's the woman's body, so she has the right to do what she wants.

You said it for me man.

Personally, I fully agree that it's a woman's right to choose whether or not to have an abortion, for numerous reasons... have it be from rape, medical reasons, etc... However, there are teens and other couples out there who are careless in their actions to practice 'safe' sex. There are instances that occur when people are careless, get pregnant, and for no other reason other than not wanting to assume the consequences or responsibility choose to have an abortion. While fortunately I have never come face-to-face with the experience, I find it hard to believe that there are young people out there who have had multiple abortions, while in a stable relationship, for no other reason than not wanting to assume responsibility. Every time you have sex you are accepting a certain risk, and if you aren't willing to be responsible for your actions and the consequences thereafter you shouldn't be doing it.

There are so many fit, responsible couples out there who cannot conceive a child who desperately want to. At the very least a couple, or biological mother, should consider seeing the pregnancy through in order to give the child up for adoption. So even if she is knowingly incapable to care for another life, others will be.

Written by Daggon on 22.07.2009 at 06:20

Written by [user id=39721] on 27.02.2009 at 23:41

Not may people agree with my views on this, but I believe that it's the woman's body, so she has the right to do what she wants.

You said it for me man.

Women don't have the right to commit murder any more than men do.

Written by bloodwrage on 01.08.2009 at 22:01

Women don't have the right to commit murder any more than men do.

they have as more as they hold baby nine months inside their bodies risking death or serious problems during this period, then when giving birth and then still couple of weeks after...piss every man who think he knows it better (only Thomas Beatie can say something about it )

That's why parents should properly educate their children. Most teenagers who get pregnant are the ones whose families did not bother discussing it. It is something that parents must do at a young age with their children. There are options, but most parents will dismiss them. They think, if I give my child birth control, I'm giving her the right to have sex. That is wrong. Just because she's on the pill doesn't mean she'll have sex. Chances are she'll have sex regardless, with or without the pill.

Women do have the right, in my opinion, but it should not be after the child has developed, naturally. It should be done immediately.

What about guys who don't want the baby, but their girlfriends do? Shouldn't the guy have a choice as well? Well, he had the choice when he put his wang in that slip n' slide, but he should have already taken the appropriate precautions.

Written by TheBigRossowski on 24.08.2009 at 14:43

Shouldn't the guy have a choice as well?

imo he shouldnt...again for the same reason - the girl is about to care since she got pregnant, it is not guy's business anymore...he should reconsider it well before he had sex

Written by TheBigRossowski on 24.08.2009 at 14:43

What about guys who don't want the baby, but their girlfriends do? Shouldn't the guy have a choice as well? Well, he had the choice when he put his wang in that slip n' slide, but he should have already taken the appropriate precautions.

We can always run away in open road , but first we men shood think about have sex or not have if we have no condom whit us, damn if we want ther eoral way to do it to there no need vaginal penetration at all for have fun.

Written by Ellrohir on 24.08.2009 at 15:58

Written by TheBigRossowski on 24.08.2009 at 14:43

Shouldn't the guy have a choice as well?

imo he shouldnt...again for the same reason - the girl is about to care since she got pregnant, it is not guy's business anymore...he should reconsider it well before he had sex

Too late

No, we have no kids and we won't for awhile. I'm pretty sure as a 16 yr. old, my penis thought for me. And his decisions were not too wise, lol.

Yes, but therefore you own no right for decisions about baby you made because of this "not too wise" decision

Even in 16 I was how to say more responsible, I didnt wanna do it whit out more thinking , because if there be some accident she get prognent, I be dead my parents killed me, or I shood kill her or my self .... what a choose

And the fact you survived proofs such a "strategy" works

Written by Warlock84 on 22.07.2009 at 09:12

Personally, I fully agree that it's a woman's right to choose whether or not to have an abortion, for numerous reasons... have it be from rape, medical reasons, etc... However, there are teens and other couples out there who are careless in their actions to practice 'safe' sex. There are instances that occur when people are careless, get pregnant, and for no other reason other than not wanting to assume the consequences or responsibility choose to have an abortion. While fortunately I have never come face-to-face with the experience, I find it hard to believe that there are young people out there who have had multiple abortions, while in a stable relationship, for no other reason than not wanting to assume responsibility. Every time you have sex you are accepting a certain risk, and if you aren't willing to be responsible for your actions and the consequences thereafter you shouldn't be doing it.

There are so many fit, responsible couples out there who cannot conceive a child who desperately want to. At the very least a couple, or biological mother, should consider seeing the pregnancy through in order to give the child up for adoption. So even if she is knowingly incapable to care for another life, others will be.

agreed.

My mom actually had a child at the age of 16 and since she doesn't believe in abortion, she gave it up for adoption to a rich couple. There was another time when my mom was forced to have an abortion due to medical reasons...she would have died if she didn't have it and chances are the baby would have died anyways.

At least she was allowed to have abortion when it threatened her life...some fanatics would let here die because "it is the god's will"

Written by Ellrohir on 19.09.2009 at 23:23

At least she was allowed to have abortion when it threatened her life...some fanatics would let here die because "it is the god's will"

...so was the Holocaust

Don't ever bring that up to Christians in Midwest Texas, their brains will fully shut down in shock.

I dont plan to visit Midwest Texas

It's not a bad place, Austin is actually a very liberal college town and the surrounding hill country is beautiful. Austin is an amazing live music town also.

As for abortion, I think it is the willful ending of a life. I do not support it unless the mother's life is in jeopardy.

Think about it this way... a fetus is like a tumor it has a life.. however one is a human life the other one its just a cluster of cells... both can be just as big and both can be killed differently..... so really whats the difference? a life is a life and life will generate itself in different ways....

Written by flickaa on 03.10.2009 at 21:18

Think about it this way... a fetus is like a tumor it has a life.. however one is a human life the other one its just a cluster of cells... both can be just as big and both can be killed differently..... so really whats the difference? a life is a life and life will generate itself in different ways....

To classify a living thing, remember MRS NERG: Movement Reproduction Sensitivity Nutrition Excretion Respiration Growth. By this reasoning your statement is correct. But people hold certain living things to a higher standard than other living things, usually with our own species at the top of the list. This makes sense for self-serving reasons, from our perspective, out of all the living things we encounter- who could be more important than a human? It is through this viewfinder than many people view a fetus as either an amalgamation of cells or a developing person with a soul.

I am neither for or against abortion based on the simple fact that I will never be pregnant.

Written by Introspekrieg on 03.10.2009 at 21:30

Written by flickaa on 03.10.2009 at 21:18

Think about it this way... a fetus is like a tumor it has a life.. however one is a human life the other one its just a cluster of cells... both can be just as big and both can be killed differently..... so really whats the difference? a life is a life and life will generate itself in different ways....

To classify a living thing, remember MRS NERG: Movement Reproduction Sensitivity Nutrition Excretion Respiration Growth. By this reasoning your statement is correct. But people hold certain living things to a higher standard than other living things, usually with our own species at the top of the list. This makes sense for self-serving reasons, from our perspective, out of all the living things we encounter- who could be more important than a human? It is through this viewfinder than many people view a fetus as either an amalgamation of cells or a developing person with a soul.

I am neither for or against abortion based on the simple fact that I will never be pregnant.

you say that because you're a man XD but put yourself in a womans' positon

In the woman's position in my Own country: the women, they always think that when they are pregnant, they dont dare or precisely, they dont want to do abortion because they think the fetus will become their children, they do not know Christianity atitude or Catholic's, just they do not want to be a mother killing her children. , no comment, .But maybe that for those women in 4 years go, now MAYBE still but less.

What I want to discuss here is: the responsibility of the women, do they want their CHILDren for their aftermath of SEX ? I do not speak on behalf of the voice of women, but I want to tell you that I have met some US women, very young. They all have children even in 17 and 18, and you know, they are not rich, they work to raise their kids, I did not ask why they had not do abortion because I have not come to this thread before . One of them told me that she a bit regrets, because raising their kids need money, but you know they have support from their parents or the grand parents of the kids, social instution etc.

Written by Bad English on 24.08.2009 at 16:17

Written by TheBigRossowski on 24.08.2009 at 14:43

What about guys who don't want the baby, but their girlfriends do? Shouldn't the guy have a choice as well? Well, he had the choice when he put his wang in that slip n' slide, but he should have already taken the appropriate precautions.

damn if we want ther eoral way to do it to there no need vaginal penetration at all for have fun.

Written by Bad English on 25.08.2009 at 13:11

Even in 16 I was how to say more responsible, I didnt wanna do it whit out more thinking , because if there be some accident she get prognent, I be dead my parents killed me, or I shood kill her or my self .... what a choose

16, is that in 2000? Geeze, too bad for the ppl make you do like that if you make a girl pregnant,