Is Planned Hamburger more important than the entire good of America?

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

25. My friend got a Pap Smear at Planned Parenthood, so I support their abortion practice - Honest Abe

So where is the Christian alternative to Planned Parenthood? If there was another organization helping out low income women with necessary health screenings then I see why Planned Parenthood might not need support. Instead of coming up with a solution you just want to shut down the only option.

You should do a quick Google search before posting this stupid crap. There are free and reduced cost clinics all over the place that do Pap Smears without providing abortion.

[SdK]

If there have been 52 million abortions. Let's say they all have 1 kid between. Assuming an even sex split. That's 78 million more people. That kind of blows my mind. Increases the population by nearly 25%.

[SdK]

I wish I had a crystal ball to know if our economy could have supported all of those people with jobs and good education.

[SdK]

If illegals (edit I meant immigrants) are messing up our economy, I'm not sure America could have handled 78+ million more people

Edit: i believe KSU is the one who posted that economist article

[Dr Rick Daris]

the only thing really going for abortion and it's probably already been mentioned in this thread are that we get less dumbasses born from dumbasses. that makes America a little better for those of us that aren't dumbasses.

a person's dumbassness or level of how much they inconvenience you with their dumbassary isn't a measure of their worth.

I didn't say it was a measure of their worth and I'm not sure what that even means. I will say that I personally believe that it lowers crime, murder, etc rates and that lowering those rates, if taken as single measure, is a net positive for me.

http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/DonohueLevittTheImpactOfLegalized2001.pdf

[Cartierfor3]

the only thing really going for abortion and it's probably already been mentioned in this thread are that we get less dumbasses born from dumbasses. that makes America a little better for those of us that aren't dumbasses.

a person's dumbassness or level of how much they inconvenience you with their dumbassary isn't a measure of their worth.

I didn't say it was a measure of their worth and I'm not sure what that even means. I will say that I personally believe that it lowers crime, murder, etc rates and that lowering those rates, if taken as single measure, is a net positive for me.

http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/DonohueLevittTheImpactOfLegalized2001.pdf

what I mean is, the basic argument I (and some others) have against abortion is that people are made by a creator, and have tremendous value simply because they are human. therefore to argue that it is a net positive for you to have less of them around is overshadowed by their value given to them by God himself. There are lots of ways to lower crime rates that we all agree would be dehumanizing, even if it was a net positive for someone like you or me.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I used to be super pro abortion but now I'm kind of on the fence and in general it just makes me sad people want to do it. there are tons of humans out there that are looking to adopt. own the mistake and give the baby that you conceived to someone that wants it. anyway that's kind of where I'm at. I guess it should be legal or whatever but dang. 

This is pretty much where I am, only I've never been super pro-abortion.

[Dr Rick Daris]

the only thing really going for abortion and it's probably already been mentioned in this thread are that we get less dumbasses born from dumbasses. that makes America a little better for those of us that aren't dumbasses.

a person's dumbassness or level of how much they inconvenience you with their dumbassary isn't a measure of their worth.

I didn't say it was a measure of their worth and I'm not sure what that even means. I will say that I personally believe that it lowers crime, murder, etc rates and that lowering those rates, if taken as single measure, is a net positive for me.

http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/DonohueLevittTheImpactOfLegalized2001.pdf

what I mean is, the basic argument I (and some others) have against abortion is that people are made by a creator, and have tremendous value simply because they are human. therefore to argue that it is a net positive for you to have less of them around is overshadowed by their value given to them by God himself. There are lots of ways to lower crime rates that we all agree would be dehumanizing, even if it was a net positive for someone like you or me.

yeah I'm not talking about, want to talk about, or am qualified to talk about any of that. my super simple point is that more abortions probably means a much lower percentage of adults that will kill and murder other adults. that's a positive. i'll leave the whole whether it's worth it argument to other people.

[Cartierfor3]

Ah, I think I get your point more now RD

[Emo EMAW]

God aside, I believe human fetuses are humans just the same, created equal and have rights guaranteed to them by the Constitution.  Of course, they have the most basic right of Life. 

[SdK]

Not trying to distract, or come up with a side debate, but Emo, do you believe everyone is created equal?

No bearing on the debate. Just curious.

[Institutional Control]

Ksuw claims to not support killing, what in his view are, admitted mass murderers, and I think he's either lying to look compassionate or he doesn't actually think abortion doctors are mass murderers.

But people can't just go around killing those who commit (what they perceive to be) horrible, but legal acts -- especially if the acts' morality is as complex as abortion.  That's something an insane person would do.  What would that universal imperative look like? 

Your child-rape center scenario is apples and oranges (as are the holocaust comparisons, on any level other than the body count).  In our world, no one debates child rape's morality.  So if I'm to jump into your hypothetical universe, I'm jumping into a universe where child rape IS ACTUALLY complicated on a moral level, and (based on that assumption) I'd stick to my guns.  If rational minds can disagree on the morality of something, people should go through rational methods of seeking change. 

Your position boxes you into acting like a psychopath.

I don't think lib or myself think that a person with a rational belief that abortion is bad and should be illegal should go to the extreme of becoming violent.  However, ksu places abortions in the US at the same level of horrificness as the Holocaust.  Which means, he's either being hyperbolic to win a political argument or to place himself on a higher moral ground then those who are pro-choice or he's a gutless pig who is willing to sit back and watch something he considers truly horrific and do nothing about it.

You can fight against abortion without being violent or blowing up clinics.

How much of a tax increase would it take to provide free birth control for everyone?  I imagine a minimal tax increase of $100 per US resident per year would reduce the number of abortions astronomically.   Essentially, people like ksu don't truly value the "innocent living fetus" as much as they value their bank account. 

[catastrophe]

The difference ksu doesnt get is that those women, who are all unaffiliated to each other sans wanting an abotion, still are the ones deciding it, i dont think the nazis asked the jews if the wanted to be killed or not. If the woman didnt want an abortion, wasnt like planned parenthood was going to hunt them down and force them to do it

The distinction you draw is the crux of the entire debate.  People that compare abortion to the Holocaust are comparing the babies to Jews, not the mothers.  The babies clearly have no say in the matter.  Your statement presupposes that the mother/baby are the same thing, which is what most pro-choice folks and almost no pro-lifers believe.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

For ksuw there is no valid debate over the complexity of abortion.

I'm happy to have that debate - you just need to put forward something besides the 25 stupid arguments I've already refuted.

[catastrophe]

If you truly believed that abortions in this country were equivalent to gas chambers of Nazi Germany, you would be doing everything in your power to shut them down.  If there were gas chambers, in my city, in my state or in my country, that were killing Jewish people, I promise I wouldn't sit idly by and watch it happen.

You do nothing but sit on a moral high horse  and probably annoy people at parties with your lame political opinions.  Until you've actually done something to prevent abortions, you should probably shut the eff up about comparing abortions to the Holocaust.

This is an argument I don't think I've actually heard before.  What would you do?  Would you write about it?  Speak or go to rallies about it? Gather a milita together and take up arms?  And are you advocating pro-lifers do the same if they truly believe what they say?

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

I don't think lib or myself think that a person with a rational belief that abortion is bad and should be illegal should go to the extreme of becoming violent.  However, ksu places abortions in the US at the same level of horrificness as the Holocaust.  Which means, he's either being hyperbolic to win a political argument or to place himself on a higher moral ground then those who are pro-choice or he's a gutless pig who is willing to sit back and watch something he considers truly horrific and do nothing about it.

I'm not being hyperbolic - I provided several very clear comparisons between the Holocaust and Planned Parenthood's abortion industry. Your "military action or hypocrisy" argument is absurd as has already been explained by both myself and Dlew. You don't like those responses, so you're just talking past them. I can't make you think rationally.

How much of a tax increase would it take to provide free birth control for everyone?  I imagine a minimal tax increase of $100 per US resident per year would reduce the number of abortions astronomically.   Essentially, people like ksu don't truly value the "innocent living fetus" as much as they value their bank account.

And here you go with more crazy talk. I would fully support federal funding for Planned Parenthood to provide free and reduced-price contraception - they just have to stop performing abortions. You think this is some sort of Bible-thumping, sex is evil, screw poor people crusade for me. It isn't. Abortion and all forms of murder are morally repugnant.

[SdK]

I wish people would just rough ridin' use plan b instead of chancing it. Can planned parenthood give away plan b if they stopped performing abortions? This is a compromise I'd be willing to make.

[catastrophe]

Why the hell would you go all in on plan b if you could just provide free birth control / contraceptives?

[SdK]

Because just because it's provided, doesn't mean it will be used. Probably true for plan be as well. I'd hope that if abortion wasn't an option more people would use plan b.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Some people just want a small government that only regulates people to protect other people from threats. Others fully support jailing drug users and women who decided to abort their baby for whatever reason. Supporting legal abortion is not necessarily the same thing as advocating abortion, and I think a lot of people fail to realize that.

[Spracne]

Because just because it's provided, doesn't mean it will be used. Probably true for plan be as well. I'd hope that if abortion wasn't an option more people would use plan b.

My British mate swears by Plan A: Don't cum in her front bum.

[mocat]

Because just because it's provided, doesn't mean it will be used. Probably true for plan be as well. I'd hope that if abortion wasn't an option more people would use plan b.

My British mate swears by Plan A: Don't cum in her front bum.

AND IF YA DON'T KNOW, NOW YA KNOW....PREGGO

[cfbandyman]

I wish people would just rough ridin' use plan b instead of chancing it. Can planned parenthood give away plan b if they stopped performing abortions? This is a compromise I'd be willing to make.

How much of a tax increase would it take to provide free birth control for everyone?  I imagine a minimal tax increase of $100 per US resident per year would reduce the number of abortions astronomically.  Essentially, people like ksu don't truly value the "innocent living fetus" as much as they value their bank account. 

These are literally the best answer out there to all of this

Stuff like that is basically been the compromise position in my mind would fall to. There needs to be available contraception freaking everywhere, and education. FTR I don't like abortion either, and can see not wanting to publicly provide money for it. But you got to give women I think the right to become pregnant when they want to, and that includes tons of education and contraception, which a lot of pro lifers that I know refuse to take part in which is patently insane to me.

IMO you solve a lot of problems (albeit not fully) by doing that. You get more kids born into families that want them, you save money and the potential wards of the state for kids born into lives that are shitty, and you produce offspring in happier and healthier situations to go onto be more productive lives, and you reduce abortion. It's as much of a win-win-win-win-win situation out there. And while it might not solve every answer, there will still be abortions, and not all kids will be better, you can't argue that in all parts the situation wouldn't improve, it would.

The difference ksu doesnt get is that those women, who are all unaffiliated to each other sans wanting an abotion, still are the ones deciding it, i dont think the nazis asked the jews if the wanted to be killed or not. If the woman didnt want an abortion, wasnt like planned parenthood was going to hunt them down and force them to do it

The distinction you draw is the crux of the entire debate.  People that compare abortion to the Holocaust are comparing the babies to Jews, not the mothers.  The babies clearly have no say in the matter.  Your statement presupposes that the mother/baby are the same thing, which is what most pro-choice folks and almost no pro-lifers believe.

Right, basically the point I was trying to get at. Basically it's still a dumb comparison. I was getting at the systematic killing off of an entire people by a government who didn't want them anymore, and basically IMO that's not what planned parenthood is about. Just the most controversial thing. Ultimately it's the mom's making that decision, and I don't think all those women are of a single mind trying to weed out an entire race of people/all babies, just the one that is in them.

Basically, I see the Holocaust as exactly what it is, an order to eradicate an entire race, or undesirable people and that be the tenet of the law. Abortion would be akin to the Holocaust if the government, or all moms, or w/e, got together and forced all babies to be aborted. It might seem trivial, but I think a very important distinction.

[catastrophe]

Some people just want a small government that only regulates people to protect other people from threats.

Another example of making a pro-choice assumption to rebut a pro-life argument.  If you view unborn babies as people, then you are most certainly trying to protect people from threats by advocating to eliminate abortion.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Some people just want a small government that only regulates people to protect other people from threats.

Another example of making a pro-choice assumption to rebut a pro-life argument.  If you view unborn babies as people, then you are most certainly trying to protect people from threats by advocating to eliminate abortion.

Do you view a woman who has had an abortion as a threat to anyone else? I could see how she might be a threat to future unborn people that she may conceive down the line, but protecting people who might never even exist doesn't make much sense to me.