1. Welcome to Georgia Tech Swarm! JOIN US and be a part of the SWARM! GO JACKETS! THWg!

Planned Parenthood Funding?

Discussion in 'The Swarm Lounge' started by AE 87, Jan 24, 2017.

  1. OldJacketFan

    OldJacketFan Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    8,781
    Nice squirrel @bewelbo. As I said you have your belief and I have mine. Mine happens to be supported by the medical community and the SCOTUS
     
  2. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    16,384
    I’m disappointed you don’t want to answer the question. If you want anybody that thinks differently than you to have sympathy for your opinions and perspective, and to learn from your perspective, you should be willing to answer questions like these. Maybe you think these are gotcha questions. But to people who think like me, these questions get to the heart of a highly contradictory position that we think people like you have. If you are unwilling to explain your position further on these, it can’t help but make us feel like you are caught in a contradiction, or indefensible policy position. I know you don’t think either side can change each other’s minds, but it is always helpful to understand the second level detail of peoples opinions when they differ significantly from your own. You automatically start from a position that has our respect based on the board that we are on here. You are not some random person on the street corner to us.
     
  3. OldJacketFan

    OldJacketFan Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    8,781
    I do see them as gotcha questions. And yes viability continues to change as science advances. No one that I am aware of is blind to the gray area that exist the closer to viability you get to. In most cases I see those questions present to get someone to answer in such a way that the questioner can go Ah Ha! You have no problem aborting a living human being!!!! You're a murderer etc. I have volunteered as an escort at clinics in my younger and healthier days and have to listen to the vilest language spewed at women exercising their rights under the law. Sorry I find it very difficult to have any sympathy for f0lks on the opposite side to the abortion issue. Yes, there are some who would not allow an abortion under ANY circumstances and some of are the loudest voice when it comes to pushing limiting legislati0n. If you take a look at Ohio the state government is dominated by the Republican party and they continually push the limit of what is constitutional and keep getting slapped down by the court. It would not shock me to see the MS law kicked as well. It is unreasonably restrictive in my opinion and the medical exemption is so thin as to able to read the screen of my laptop through it.
     
  4. Whiskey_Clear

    Whiskey_Clear Banned

    Messages:
    13,638
    Abstinence prevents unwanted pregnancies. Failing that a “morning after pill” can prevent conception.

    One can argue viability between conception and 20 weeks. This time I think good old “back water” Mississippi is ahead of the curve nationally. 20 week fetuses react to painful stimuli. I find it odd that pro-abortion folk dismiss this altogether.

    Near full term abortions.....that is pure and simple a murder imo. Just short of abandoning an unwanted newborn in the wilderness. An opinion I’ll continue to express just like you @OldJacketFan will continue to argue in favor of.
     
  5. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    16,384
    Well its too bad. I'd love to hear your perspective on it. Many folks think the science is clear - if you can see a baby living and breathing before your eyes, its a human being. Therefore, in the least we should all be able to agree that an unborn baby old enough indeed to survive should not be aborted. Many others want to go earlier than that, and that's like I said also at least something to debate. But I can't understand how a baby that can live on its own can be aborted. I'd love to hear your response at some point. I realize its getting late. To me, if you can end a baby's life when it could live, I don't see any difference between 30 weeks, 35 weeks, 40 weeks. I'd love to hear where I'm wrong or what I'm leaving out that provides more context.
     
  6. OldJacketFan

    OldJacketFan Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    8,781
    I thought I answered that when discussing viability bwelbo. If the child can survive out of the womb then abortion is not viable, to me that's common sense. That why I said about the gray area as science changes
     
  7. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    16,384
    Sorry I missed that. So I've been having a discussion with myself for the last 2 hours. :D If you are against abortion after say 20 weeks except for health exceptions, then you probably fall in line with 75% of Americans.
     
  8. OldJacketFan

    OldJacketFan Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    8,781
    It just bothers me that the 25% is continually and incessantly attacking the ability of a woman to undergo a safe medical procedure by demonizing both the procedure and the women. Oh and viability is generally medically accepted at 24-25 weeks ;)
     
  9. ATL1

    ATL1 Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    7,451
    I can’t believe people still wane on this like it’s the 1950’s but then again I see who is “President” so never mind.

    Just a bunch of men deciding what women should do with THEIR bodies.
     
  10. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    16,384
    You're completely missing the point. If you think its okay for women to end their unborn baby's life when its old enough to survive outside the mother, that's just sad. Its evil. Science and our own eyes show us that's a live human being. And you're okay with the mom killing it just because she's inconvenienced by it.

    If that's not how you feel, and you just made an overly broad statement just to be provocative, then I'm not as sad for your heart.

    Putting "President" in quotations. LOL. Like its the 1700s.

    If you are for abortion in any circumstance that the mom decides, then maybe you can answer my questions above - what's different between 30 weeks and 35 weeks? 40 weeks? 1 minute before birth? How about 5 minutes after birth? 2 years? Sad.
     
  11. Whiskey_Clear

    Whiskey_Clear Banned

    Messages:
    13,638
    Women should be and are free to do whatever they want with their own bodies but not others. They are free to have sex or abstain.

    Embryos are not parasites and are not caused by infection. They are created through a choice to engage in sexual intercouse (with the exception of rape).

    The right of women who choose to engage in sexual intercourse should not also bestow upon them the right to terminate an innocent life. Don’t want a baby? Don’t have sex. If you want to engage in sex be prepared for the natural consequence of that act.

    The “morning after pill” for goodness sakes allows even those who choose to be reckless to prevent conception from occurring. There is your opt out if you are reckless and irresponsible. There is your solution and freedom to control your own body.

    It’s avail at friggin CVS. It works up to five days after unprotected sex. Depending on type it is at least 90% effective if taken within 3 days of unprotected sex. It will not work if a woman’s body has already started ovulating. Some types are less effective in the obese, other forms are not less effective.

    Where the morning after pill is not an option the abortion pill is up another that will work up to ten weeks after unprotected sex.

    Why does the left refuse hold adults responsibile for their behavior and acts? Adults that have sex should be held accountable for the natural repercussions of sex just like gun owners should be held accountable for a lack of gun safety. Someone is careless with a gun and hurts someone, jail and or loss of gun rights should be in play. Have sex, be prepared to raise a child.

    In this day and age there is little good reason, really only life of the mother vs life of the fetus scenarios, to champion abortion after 10 weeks.
     
    bwelbo likes this.
  12. OldJacketFan

    OldJacketFan Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    8,781
  13. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    16,384
    Anybody who ever thought judges would allow this kind of thing to go through were naive at best.

    Democrats can negotiate around income taxes, healthcare laws, corporate taxes, medicare, social security, military spending, infrastructure bills, immigration... But you try to put any restrictions around the ability to end their unborn children's lives, and its a non-starter.
     
  14. OldJacketFan

    OldJacketFan Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    8,781
    Bwelbo that's bulls**t and you know it. Hyperbole at its worst and goes back to what I was saying about the hysterical. You and I discussed this issue last night and appeared to have reached common ground and you post something like this today?
     
  15. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    16,384
    I'm sorry you feel that way. But its the truth. Whether its 15 weeks or 20 weeks or 30 weeks or a waiting period or having to see an ultrasound or you name it - whatever restrictions were sought over the years were fought all the way tooth and nail.
     
  16. OldJacketFan

    OldJacketFan Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    8,781
    I'm sorry you feel that way but to assert that reasonable standards have been fought tooth and nail the left is just a false narrative. The right continues to attack a woman's right to undergo a safe medical procedure ignoring the science. The left continues to fight the unreasonable demands as contained in the MS law that was just stayed. When the right ceases to try and do away with the right of a woman to have a medical procedure the left will cease to call them out. We have a reasonable medical standard now yet there are so many on the right that will not even acknowledge that. The more the right pushes to eliminate the harder the left will push to retain.
     
  17. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    16,384
    If you can show me any proposed attempt to reduce the volume of abortions over the years that a majority of Democrats or the abortion lobby has supported, I will gladly recant my comment.
     
  18. OldJacketFan

    OldJacketFan Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    8,781
    If you can show me where there has been a proposed attempt to reduce the volume of abortions that a majority of Republicans or the anti abortion lobby has supported and I'll gladly recant my comment. Through the courts we have what most rational people feel is a reasonable situation, but show me anywhere that the right hasn't continued to push for a complete ban.
     
  19. bwelbo

    bwelbo Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    16,384
    Your comment makes no sense to me. For decades, the right has attempted to reduce the volume of abortions by moving back the acceptable end date, require parental permissions, waiting periods, viewing of ultrasounds. These bills and votes are all majority Republicans and pro-life people. I don't understand what you are trying to say.
     
  20. OldJacketFan

    OldJacketFan Helluva Engineer

    Messages:
    8,781
    Reduce volume by whatever means????? LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please. I give up trying to having a reasonable, realistic conversation with you on this subject. Your prejudices surface very quickly and this is exactly the mindset I have worked against for over 2 decades. Please have the courtesy not to engage me relative to this subject going forward, it would serve no purpose for you or I.
     

Share This Page