Why "Planned Parenthood" is wrong.

[Mavorpen]

1. Abstinence is hard yes, but anything good enough is worth waiting for.

About that....

How aren't they facts? How many sources have I given you? Let me count the ways.
1) http://www.avert.org/sex-education.htm
2) http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/abstinence07/
3) http://www.now.org/issues/abortion/032210abonly.html
4) http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/04 ... education/
5) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01003.html
6) http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db89.pdf

The fact is, contraception reduces pregnancy rates, not abstinence. I could care less if my position makes sense to you. You've provided no evidence of any sort that yours does.

2. And here we go again, the foetus is not forcing anything to happen, it hasn't the capacity to make a choice.

Oxford Dictionarydisagrees.

3. black slavery didn't affect white people did it? should that have stopped the abolitionists?

I'd rather you not compare me, a developed human being/person to a fetus, something breaking a woman's bodily sovereignty, stealing the mother's resources, and has the sentience of a rat.

4. "It doesn't matter if they are human. Being human doesn't grant you special rights." Yes it does, if I kill my dog that's hardly a legal murder is it? The first requirement for murder is that the thing killed is human, then that the killing be planned and unjust.

Weren't you the one that said the debate is over whether something should be illegal? Aren't you the one that used the word murder incorrectly and now you're using it correctly when it benefits you? The irony here is hilarious.

Anyway, you didn't even address the point. I said being human doesn't grant you special rights. Obviously I meant inherent rights. Nothing has inherent rights. We give things rights. You can try giving rights to a fetus, but that would be silly. Why would you give rights to something with the sentience of a rat and refuse to give rights to a rat?

Then we'd go back to, "because they're human!" without you ever explaining why that warrants special rights.

"A fetus is nowhere near the mental capacity or independence of a born child nor a fully developed human being." How exactly is a 8 month (measuring from conception) old born child different from a 8 month old unborn child? Were talking about the same freaking being that is legal to kill one day and the killing is called murder if it happens a day latter.

One is stealing nutrients from the mother against her will, is forcing the mother to house it in the mother's body, etc. How many of us have said this?

"First prove it's an injustice before you make stupid comparisons." thats what I am trying to do.

5. In regard to the fact that beings that were human were denied personhood and treated as property, its pretty darn similar.

It isn't similar at all. "One is stealing nutrients from the mother against her will, is forcing the mother to house it in the mother's body, etc. How many of us have said this?" Seriously dude, read.

6. Sorry, but I think the comparison of abortion to slavery is necessary. Centuries ago (or sadly enough even today) people found it easy to see dark skin and think that blacks were subordinate to the whims of whites. Now its just as easy and common for people to think of the unborn and see them as something subordinate to the desires of more fully developed humans.

"One is stealing nutrients from the mother against her will, is forcing the mother to house it in the mother's body, etc. How many of us have said this?" Again, learn to read.

7. And making murder illegal doesn't stop all murders, but if abortion is wrong and we do nothing then we allow the biggest mass murder in human history to go onwards unchecked and unchallenged.

I'll post it again, since you seem to be unable to read.

To enforce the decree, society was strictly controlled. Motherhood was described as "the meaning of women's lives" and praised in sex education courses and women's magazines, and various written materials were distributed detailing information on prenatal and child care, the benefits of children, ways to ensure marital harmony, and the consequences of abortion.[5] Contraceptives disappeared from the shelves and were soon only available to educated urban women with access to the black market, many of them with Hungarian roots. [5] In 1986, any woman working for or attending a state institution was forced to undergo at least annual gynecological exams to ensure a satisfying level of reproductive health as well as detect pregnancy, which were followed until birth.[5] Women with histories of abortion were watched particularly carefully. [5]

Medical practitioners were also expected to follow stringent policies and were held partially responsible for the national birthrate. If they were caught breaking any aspect of the abortion law, they were to be incarcerated, though some prosecutors were paid off in exchange for a lesser sentence.[5] Each administrative region had a Disciplinary Board for Health Personnel, which disciplined all law-breaking health practitioners and on occasion had show trials to make examples of people. Sometimes, however, punishments were lessened for cooperation. [5] Despite the professional risks involved, many doctors helped women determined to have abortions, recognizing that if they did not, she would turn to a more dangerous, life-threatening route. This was done by falsely diagnosing them with an illness that qualified them for an abortion, such as diabetes or hepatitis, or prescribing them drugs that were known to counter-induce pregnancy, such as chemotherapy or antimalarial drugs.[5] When a physician did not want to help or could not be bribed to perform an abortion, however, women went to less experienced abortionists or used old remedies.[5]

From 1979 to 1988, the number of abortions increased, save for a decline in 1984-1985.[5] Despite this, many unwanted children were born, as their parents could scarcely afford to care for the children they already had, and were subsequently abandoned in hospitals or orphanages. Some of these children were purposely given AIDS-infected transfusions in orphanages; others were trafficked internationally through adoption.[5] Those born in this period, especially between 1966 and 1972, are nicknamed the decreţei (singular decreţel), a word with a negative nuance due to the perceived mental and physical damage due to the risky pregnancies and failed illegal abortions.[8]

Making abortion illegal would "create the greatest number of mass murders in history." Get over yourself and think about others for once.

[Parchelon]

Not so vile, because its citizens can emigrate by walking a few hundred meters. And as far as I know, the only punishment its "courts" can apply is excommunication.

You do realize that this is a organization that is trying to push its control onto other countries, right?

im sorry man but you cant be serrious, a nation of a few thousand trying to gain control over millions of people in other nations? I mean at worst they might lobby against abortion or contraception being funded by the UN or on national levels, or abortion being legalized, or protecting religious rights or lobby against china's human rights record, I would hardly call that a tyrannical and vile theocracy. Its most prominent position worldwide is a freaking observer status at the UN. I mean sure they have the Pope, yeah ok, but he is hardly a threat to democracy.

[Blakk Metal]

A lot of people are saying that abortion is wrong because it is murder. Abortion is not murder. A young foetus is not a person, it has no impression of the world. I can't really say much more on that.

Regarding the view that it's murder because its killing a potential person. This argument should be disregarded for lack of integrity if it isn't also applied to masturbation, contraception and women being allowed to have periods, when they could have been pregnant. A sperm/egg cell has the potential of creating a person, but people don't think of it as such becauce neither can think. The same should apply to foetuses.

The leaving of Sperm and eggs to die is not in any sense of the word murder, such things (separated) if left to their own devices would never become a human being, but put them together ether in the uterus of a woman and when conception takes place a new DNA code is created and when left alone to natural growth develops into us. Its an entirely different circumstance.

If a fetus is left to its own devices, it rots.

[Danbershan]

A lot of people are saying that abortion is wrong because it is murder. Abortion is not murder. A young foetus is not a person, it has no impression of the world. I can't really say much more on that.

Regarding the view that it's murder because its killing a potential person. This argument should be disregarded for lack of integrity if it isn't also applied to masturbation, contraception and women being allowed to have periods, when they could have been pregnant. A sperm/egg cell has the potential of creating a person, but people don't think of it as such becauce neither can think. The same should apply to foetuses.

The leaving of Sperm and eggs to die is not in any sense of the word murder, such things (separated) if left to their own devices would never become a human being, but put them together ether in the uterus of a woman and when conception takes place a new DNA code is created and when left alone to natural growth develops into us. Its an entirely different circumstance.

If you left a foetus lying around by itself, it would die. So that's not a valid argument.

OK, so if there's a complete genetic code it's a person? So when I scrape some skin off, the pieces of seperated skin should have a right to life?

[Mavorpen]

The leaving of Sperm and eggs to die is not in any sense of the word murder, such things (separated) if left to their own devices would never become a human being, but put them together ether in the uterus of a woman and when conception takes place a new DNA code is created and when left alone to natural growth develops into us. Its an entirely different circumstance.

Please, take a fetus out of the mother without killing it, and allow it to be "left to their own device." The fetus would die. The fetus survives because of it's mother. It does nothing by itself. Similarly, sperm does nothing by itself. It needs the help of the male.

[AiliailiA]

A lot of people are saying that abortion is wrong because it is murder. Abortion is not murder. A young foetus is not a person, it has no impression of the world. I can't really say much more on that.

Regarding the view that it's murder because its killing a potential person. This argument should be disregarded for lack of integrity if it isn't also applied to masturbation, contraception and women being allowed to have periods, when they could have been pregnant. A sperm/egg cell has the potential of creating a person, but people don't think of it as such becauce neither can think. The same should apply to foetuses.

The leaving of Sperm and eggs to die is not in any sense of the word murder, such things (separated) if left to their own devices would never become a human being, but put them together ether in the uterus of a woman and when conception takes place a new DNA code is created and when left alone to natural growth

Uh, huh. So abortion would be OK if the fetus was not killed, but simply removed from the woman. And left alone to natural growth.

Its an entirely different circumstance.

No, actually. An egg can be removed from a woman, and a sperm likewise ... though I must say, sperm are more forthcoming that way. You can get both, put them together in a warm saline environment and bingo: a child!

Good luck keeping it alive without the aid of a woman and her womb though. You're working on that I expect.

[Dyakovo]

2: And? Being genetically human does not make something a person (which by the way is what a "human being" is.)
3: Research, you should try it.
4: No, the embryo/zygote/foetus is not a human being.

2. You are evading my statement. I highly doubt that you could come up with a better definition (other than that only humans have souls, but that is a religious argument and useless in a secular debate).
3. I have.
4. I have provided points as to why unborn children are human beings, but you have not provided any as to why they are not.

2: No, I haven't, you keep repeating the claim that if it is genetically human it is a person.

a being characterized by consciousness, rationality, and a moral sense, and traditionally thought of as consisting of both a body and a mind

4: Your points are wrong. By your standard a tumor is a person because it is genetically human.

[AiliailiA]

The leaving of Sperm and eggs to die is not in any sense of the word murder, such things (separated) if left to their own devices would never become a human being, but put them together ether in the uterus of a woman and when conception takes place a new DNA code is created and when left alone to natural growth develops into us. Its an entirely different circumstance.

Please, take a fetus out of the mother without killing it, and allow it to be "left to their own device."

You've got this covered. Time for me to get some sleep I think.

[Ifreann]

you need to read up on why women have late term abortions.

late term abortions are generally not allowed unless the fetus has a devastating defect that wont allow it to survive, is dying or dead already, or is one of those things plus a danger to the life or health of the mother.

they arent done when a woman could have a happy healthy baby but wakes up one day in her 9th month and wants to kill it instead.

Well they are in China and some other place ... Singapore? But you can be excused for US-centrism, it's the only place outside of vile theocracies (or the Vatican) where pro-life has any traction.

Ahem, Ireland may be vile, but we're not a theocracy.

[Parchelon]

Abortion honestly creeps me the hell out, I mean, the thought that hundreds if not thousands of fetuses are killed every day, that so many of them weren't a threat to the mothers health but are killed because they are inconvenient, or the product of rape. It kinda makes me cry at night, and keeps me awake, which really sucks, but not as much as all those dead not-yet-babies. So many people lose children through a miscarriage, and then other people go in for a medically induced and controlled miscarriage? It's just-that could have been a person. Maybe not the smartest person, maybe not someone who would change the world, but a person. A living, thinking, breathing person who will never get a chance to live because their mother didn't want them. There are so many ways to lose your kids, abortion is basically killing them before they get to live. It's like pre-murder or something.

Source for hundreds and thousands of fetuses aborted each day at Planned Parenthood?

As for staying up at night crying about other people whom you don't know, you may wish to speak to someone who can help you with your emotions.

How about Planned Parenthood? According to their annual report for the 2009-2010 they preformed 331,796 abortions in 2009 and 329,445 in 2010
http://issuu.com/actionfund/docs/ppfa_f ... doublePage (page 5 of 12 which is really the third slide) made nearly 10 million over expenses.

[Parchelon]

Yup, and a fetus is not a person yet. There is a difference between a human being and human tissue.

Ah good, I'm not completely losing my mind. I'm on NSG so I must be partially crazy.

So...is a baby that is still partially in the birth canal a half a person ?

Technically in Canada as long as a toe of the baby is still in the mother it can be aborted. America is lucky to have banned partial birth abortions.

[Blakk Metal]

Well they are in China and some other place ... Singapore? But you can be excused for US-centrism, it's the only place outside of vile theocracies (or the Vatican) where pro-life has any traction.

Ahem, Ireland may be vile, but we're not a theocracy.

It listened to the Catholic Church. Which is worse, since that the church is basically a 2nd generation atheist stereotype of religion.

[Parchelon]

Certainly killing can be justified, as I stated in the last post, I was just trying to elaborate on the distinction between killing a person who did not choose to be in a situation (abortion) and someone who did (a soldier of a western nation).

Once again, missing the definition of a person. A foetus isn't a person yet.

Must we differentiate personhood from humanhood in regards to murder? Merriam-Webster sure as heck didn't seem to do that

[Sociobiology]

The leaving of Sperm and eggs to die is not in any sense of the word murder, such things (separated) if left to their own devices would never become a human being, but put them together ether in the uterus of a woman and when conception takes place a new DNA code is created and when left alone to natural growth

Uh, huh. So abortion would be OK if the fetus was not killed, but simply removed from the woman. And left alone to natural growth.

that was (and in some places still is) a popular way to kill infants.

[Mavorpen]

Once again, missing the definition of a person. A foetus isn't a person yet.

Must we differentiate personhood from humanhood in regards to murder? Merriam-Webster sure as heck didn't seem to do that

Probably because they thought people would know they aren't the same.

[AiliailiA]

You do realize that this is a organization that is trying to push its control onto other countries, right?

im sorry man but you cant be serrious, a nation of a few thousand trying to gain control over millions of people in other nations? I mean at worst they might lobby against abortion or contraception being funded by the UN or on national levels, or abortion being legalized, or protecting religious rights or lobby against china's human rights record, I would hardly call that a tyrannical and vile theocracy. Its most prominent position worldwide is a freaking observer status at the UN. I mean sure they have the Pope, yeah ok, but he is hardly a threat to democracy.

I wouldn't say so either. However, the Catholic Church does have power over people's beliefs, and their teaching has led to the deaths of millions of born children.

I'm talking about their teaching against contraception of course. You would do a lot of good for your pro-life position if you would now speak clearly in opposition to the Catholic Church on the matter of contraception. Many undecided would think better of "pro-life" if pro-lifers would make common cause as "pro-choice" has always offered: reduce abortions by reducing the need for them. You can be pro-life and also be pro-contraception, or you can side with the Catholic Church and be plain-out cruel.

[AiliailiA]

Uh, huh. So abortion would be OK if the fetus was not killed, but simply removed from the woman. And left alone to natural growth.

that was (and in some places still is) a popular way to kill infants.

Leave room for a miracle to happen I guess.

[Muckistania]

It is funny that the OP is attacked mostly on the one point he is correct about. That most of mankinds problems stem from laziness. Laziness is on the rise and is leading to a polarization of the world which is breading contempt for the people.

[Mavorpen]

It is funny that the OP is attacked mostly on the one point he is correct about. That most of mankinds problems stem from laziness. Laziness is on the rise and is leading to a polarization of the world which is breading contempt for the people.

What this has to do with Planned Parenthood, I have no clue.

[Inky Noodles]

Has no one realized the OP's namesake yet?

No one!?

[Inky Noodles]

Richard Bastion

[Israslovakahzerbajan]

The OP is the PRC's nightmare...

[Parchelon]

Perhaps, but human none the less.

It's only human tissue, there's no real personhood. Its akin to amputation of an arm, or removal of an appendix.

Well thats a hell of a comfort! The only thing wrong with it is that arms or kidneys don't have DNA different from your own, they don't grow for the express purpose of leaving your body, that don't have eyes, their own heartbeat, or brain waves. Besides have you ever even heard of an abortion procedure described? It made me feel like vomiting the first time I heard it spoken of, if you wish I could send you a telegram with the details, if I post the actual details here in public eyes it might not provoke the best reaction from the people or the moderators seeing as how it aint exactly pg-13 stuff.

Do you see a woman getting her tubes tied, or a man getting a vasectomy, as wrong?

That good sir is something I am not willing to debate, though for the sake of curiosity yes I do.

[Mavorpen]

Well thats a hell of a comfort! The only thing wrong with it is that arms or kidneys don't have DNA different from your own, they don't grow for the express purpose of leaving your body, that don't have eyes, their own heartbeat, or brain waves. Besides have you ever even heard of an abortion procedure described? It made me feel like vomiting the first time I heard it spoken of, if you wish I could send you a telegram with the details, if I post the actual details here in public eyes it might not provoke the best reaction from the people or the moderators seeing as how it aint exactly pg-13 stuff.

It's really no worse than a slaughterhouse for livestock. Slaughterhouses are worse.

[Muckistania]

Has anyone mentioned planned parenthood, the supposed topic of this thread in the past 10 pages or so?

I disagree with the idea of planned parenthood. Parenthood is part of life, a significant part. Any person of any worth aught to have some life plan, parenthood should just be a natural extension of that should the person want to become a parent.

For those completely incapable of anticipating the obvious consequences of their actions, who gives a shit about them.