[Abortion][REVISED POLL] If you had the power...

[New Portucalia]

I support paying women to abort their pregnancies? This is news to me.

Pro-choice is what it says it is: pro-choice. I don't give two soft shits whether someone I don't know aborts or carries to term. I do care, however, whether someone forces them to make either decision. Forcing someone to abort their pregnancy is disgusting. Forcing someone to carry to term is equally disgusting.

So you were not part of the people saying abortion be mandatory for low income people? And how the abortion is cheaper then paying for the child?

No one said that low income people had to have abortions, the only point that was made that vaguely resembles that was that if someone can't afford to keep a child fed, clothed and educated then does that child really have any quality of life? Or are you one of those pro-lifers that only cares about the fetus? Also abortion is cheaper than raising a child. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here.

Edit: Not sure why I started my sentence with "also".

[The New California Republic]

So you were not part of the people saying abortion be mandatory for low income people?

When was that ever said in the thread? Stop fabricating things that people have not said. You are intentionally trying to distort the discussion, not good.

[New Portucalia]

So you were not part of the people saying abortion be mandatory for low income people?

When was that ever said in the thread? Stop fabricating things that people have not said. You are intentionally trying to distort the discussion, not good.

Sometimes strawmanning is the only way one can win an argument.

[Yugoslavyia]

It should be completely illegal; anyone caught engaging in it should be punished just as a murderer would be, if not more harshly.

[Keshiland]

So you were not part of the people saying abortion be mandatory for low income people?

When was that ever said in the thread? Stop fabricating things that people have not said. You are intentionally trying to distort the discussion, not good.

No I am not! Explain this!

The Sauganash Union wrote:
Mandatory for welfare-recipients, felons, and guest workers.

Hmmmmm....
I'm on the fence. If it was going to be mandatory for them they'd have to be paid for by the state me thinks.

That's fine. The cost of their abortions is far cheaper than the costs of their spawn.

[VoVoDoCo]

When was that ever said in the thread? Stop fabricating things that people have not said. You are intentionally trying to distort the discussion, not good.

No I am not! Explain this!

That's fine. The cost of their abortions is far cheaper than the costs of their spawn.

Not the poor. Felons. And even then it wasn't discussed very much. Simply he put out an idea. I said hmmmmm.
Low income wasn't brought up.

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

I knew you guys were pro abortion. Wanting to pay people to get abortions sick.

That's all pro choice is pro abortion

No, not really. Of course your particular poison here has been well-documented by yourself in page after page of ... whatever it is you've tried to base your stance on and been maundering on about nonsensically, so I'm surprised you continue to claim the moral high ground here.

Protip: You aren't standing on it.

You've repeatedly spoken out in favor of:
a) Abuse and torture methods to prevent abortions
b) Withdrawal of rights for the mother
c) Virtual imprisonment of the mother

And a number of rather unsavory stances concerning the entire thing.

You've refused to offer a logical reason for any of it, simply stating you're against it, reiterating the fact that you'll do anything in your power, whether legal, moral, or not, to prevent abortions, offered statements that are at odds with one another during the course of the discussion, continually moved goalposts, went off on unrelated tangents, and more or less simply kept being argumentative for the sake of arguing. Surely there's a bridge somewhere that misses its resident by this point.

Folks, there is no talking sense to certain posters on here. We know this, yes? There are some who will argue in circles just to see themselves talk, so to speak. There's been ample thoughtful, well-presented posts throughout, but there's been a whole lot of outright cow flop as well. At what point does one chalk things up to 'pearls before swine' and move one? NSG may never know.

Not sure that there's an ap for that. >_>

[VoVoDoCo]

No I am not! Explain this!

Not the poor. Felons. And even then it wasn't discussed very much. Simply he put out an idea. I said hmmmmm.
Low income wasn't brought up.

EDIT. After rereading it I see welfare recipients. Nvm I'm not for that. But don't group all pro choicers with that.

[New Portucalia]

It should be completely illegal; anyone caught engaging in it should be punished just as a murderer would be, if not more harshly.

What about in cases such as rape, teenage pregnancy, malformation of the fetus or health issues for the mother? Asking those specific occasions since it's clear you don't care about the rights of the mother. Also, what's the reasoning behind your opinion?

[The New California Republic]

No I am not! Explain this!

The Sauganash Union wrote: Mandatory for welfare-recipients, felons, and guest workers.

So from some casual musings of just a couple of fringe people (the meaning of their statements is not entirely clear anyway, since it was not discussed at length), you are throwing all pro-choice people into the same basket as them? Thanks for unfairly tarnishing pro-choice people with the same brush...

[Attempted Socialism]

It would seem that Keshiland, for whatever reason (Possibly a poor grasp on English or sanity) confuses a single person (Who left two comments specifically after 'population control' was included in the poll for shits and giggles, without engaging in the debate in other ways) with the pro-choice stand. It's not precisely a strawman, as someone did technically propose it, rather it's an insane version of a whole bunch of fallacies.

Keshiland confusing pro-choice with being pro-abortion is saying a lot. If that was a real position, I could understand some qualms. Of course it's ludicrous to think that being pro-choice equals pro-abortion (In fact, pro-abortion would be as much anti-choice as the "pro"-"life" position is really just a rebranding of an anti-choice, anti-women position), but I have yet to see an argument from Keshiland that was not ludicrous, so perhaps I should not be surprised.

[VoVoDoCo]

No I am not! Explain this!

So from some casual musings of just a couple of fringe people (the meaning of their statements is not entirely clear anyway, since it was not discussed at length), you are throwing all pro-choice people into the same basket as them? Thanks for unfairly tarnishing pro-choice people with the same brush...

^This. I myself was not completely on board with it. Casual musings is a great phrase to describe it. I'm can't speak for TSU, but I could describe how I felt about it as a passing interest, I didn't immediately adopt the idea. You can't group all Prochoicers because of this small conversation.

[Keshiland]

No I am not! Explain this!

So from some casual musings of just a couple of fringe people (the meaning of their statements is not entirely clear anyway, since it was not discussed at length), you are throwing all pro-choice people into the same basket as them? Thanks for unfairly tarnishing pro-choice people with the same brush...

If we have to answer for pro birthers then you have to answer for them and people who have the same mandatory abortions for X Y Z

[Salandriagado]

Hmm, you make a valid point. Maybe a compromise, the clinics do get subsidies yet the fetuses still go to research. Eh, I'm not one good with coming up things, I'll leave that to the professionals, but thank you for expanding my knowledge. For I believe you are correct.

Or fetuses don't go to research and instead get proper burials like other people.

Surely that's a decision for the parents? I mean, when I die, my body is going to research. Also, if the child died after birth, the parents would be perfectly allowed to make such a decision. Why would you have more rules about what you can do with an aborted foetus than you could with a dead child?

[VoVoDoCo]

So from some casual musings of just a couple of fringe people (the meaning of their statements is not entirely clear anyway, since it was not discussed at length), you are throwing all pro-choice people into the same basket as them? Thanks for unfairly tarnishing pro-choice people with the same brush...

If we have to answer for pro birthers then you have to answer for them and people who have the same mandatory abortions for X Y Z

I'm not asking you to answer to pro birth. Who here is?

[The of Japan]

So from some casual musings of just a couple of fringe people (the meaning of their statements is not entirely clear anyway, since it was not discussed at length), you are throwing all pro-choice people into the same basket as them? Thanks for unfairly tarnishing pro-choice people with the same brush...

^This. I myself was not completely on board with it. Casual musings is a great word to describe it. I'm can't speak for TSU, but I could describe how I felt about as an interest, I didn't immediately adopt the idea. You can't group all Prochoicers because of this small conversation.

I see mandatory abortions as being hypocracy for those who support that while calling themselves "pro choice", the rest I'm ok with given that I am pro choice

[Keshiland]

If we have to answer for pro birthers then you have to answer for them and people who have the same mandatory abortions for X Y Z

I'm not asking you to answer to pro birth. Who here is?

I mean in general anytime I gave this debate "online" "people say your not pro life your pro birth." "Pro life only care about the baby while its in the womb." I know you have seen it happen before.

[VoVoDoCo]

^This. I myself was not completely on board with it. Casual musings is a great word to describe it. I'm can't speak for TSU, but I could describe how I felt about as an interest, I didn't immediately adopt the idea. You can't group all Prochoicers because of this small conversation.

I see mandatory abortions as being hypocracy for those who support that while calling themselves "pro choice", the rest I'm ok with given that I am pro choice

I do apologize. My response to the idea of mandatory abortions for those three groups were very much a reflex. After actually reflecting on that post it doesn't make sense.

[The of Japan]

I see mandatory abortions as being hypocracy for those who support that while calling themselves "pro choice", the rest I'm ok with given that I am pro choice

I do apologize. My response to the idea of mandatory abortions for those three groups were very much a reflex. After actually reflecting on that post it doesn't make sense.

K, I was actually "pro-life" just a couple months ago (my dad is a staunch conservative) but I have in some ways changed.

[The New California Republic]

If we have to answer for pro birthers then you have to answer for them and people who have the same mandatory abortions for X Y Z

What are you talking about? Where on earth was it ever said that all pro-lifers have to answer for pro-birthers?

Also, I don't have to answer for anything. You, on the other hand, have a lot of explaining to do in relation to your derogatory comments about women.

[Attempted Socialism]

I'm not asking you to answer to pro birth. Who here is?

I mean in general anytime I gave this debate "online" "people say your not pro life your pro birth." "Pro life only care about the baby while its in the womb." I know you have seen it happen before.

Because it's an accurate description of your position, as the example you refused to answer some 10 pages ago showcased.
Kid, just because you don't feel like defending your position, doesn't mean you can strawman the hell out of any opposing position. Pro-choice is exactly that: Giving the woman the choice of whether to terminate their pregnancy or not. Anyone proposing mandatory abortions are, by definition, taking choice away from women. They're forcing their opinion on women just as much as you are; you're both anti-choice (The only difference being that you actually hold your abhorrent position, while no 'mandatory abortion' political or policy position exists).

[Keshiland]

If we have to answer for pro birthers then you have to answer for them and people who have the same mandatory abortions for X Y Z

What are you talking about? Where on earth was it ever said that all pro-lifers have to answer for pro-birthers?

Also, I don't have to answer for anything. You, on the other hand, have a lot of explaining to do in relation to your derogatory comments about women.

Apparently, you don't know what derogatory means. It means saying or doing something meant to demean a demographic. Considering I have been equally as harsh on men (if not here they other threads/comment sections) and have only said that I want those things to happen or do those things to stop abortions is not derogatory. Funny how it was the march for women (pro-choice) who banned pro-life women from marching with them and then verbally attacked them for their rally.

[Keshiland]

I mean in general anytime I gave this debate "online" "people say your not pro life your pro birth." "Pro life only care about the baby while its in the womb." I know you have seen it happen before.

Because it's an accurate description of your position, as the example you refused to answer some 10 pages ago showcased.
Kid, just because you don't feel like defending your position, doesn't mean you can strawman the hell out of any opposing position. Pro-choice is exactly that: Giving the woman the choice of whether to terminate their pregnancy or not. Anyone proposing mandatory abortions are, by definition, taking choice away from women. They're forcing their opinion on women just as much as you are; you're both anti-choice (The only difference being that you actually hold your abhorrent position, while no 'mandatory abortion' political or policy position exists).

You didn't try to straw man my side with that ridiculous question? Look I have said constantly that I am full fledged pro life here is a list of positions I hold
Anti gun
Pro life
Pro UHC
Pro Immigration
Anti War
Anti Death penalty
Pro financial aid
Pro free schooling through college
Pro Universal income
Pro Adoption (which if it was not so expensive (50K in my state for a baby) I would do after college)
Pro Preventive birth control not the after pill!
I support changing the foster care system to make it easier for good families to keep the child and not move them around every few months
Pro free food for children in school all 3 meals!
I would support Universal Housing if it was a thing
Now tell me is this not PRO LIFE!

[Greater Redosia]

Because it's an accurate description of your position, as the example you refused to answer some 10 pages ago showcased.
Kid, just because you don't feel like defending your position, doesn't mean you can strawman the hell out of any opposing position. Pro-choice is exactly that: Giving the woman the choice of whether to terminate their pregnancy or not. Anyone proposing mandatory abortions are, by definition, taking choice away from women. They're forcing their opinion on women just as much as you are; you're both anti-choice (The only difference being that you actually hold your abhorrent position, while no 'mandatory abortion' political or policy position exists).

You didn't try to straw man my side with that ridiculous question? Look I have said constantly that I am full fledged pro life here is a list of positions I hold
Anti gun
Pro life
Pro UHC
Pro Immigration
Anti War
Anti Death penalty
Pro financial aid
Pro free schooling through college
Pro Universal income
Pro Adoption (which if it was not so expensive (50K in my state for a baby) I would do after college)
Pro Preventive birth control not the after pill!
I support changing the foster care system to make it easier for good families to keep the child and not move them around every few months
Pro free food for children in school all 3 meals!
I would support Universal Housing if it was a thing
Now tell me is this not PRO LIFE!

and may I ask, how does this have any correlation with what they have said.

[Keshiland]

You didn't try to straw man my side with that ridiculous question? Look I have said constantly that I am full fledged pro life here is a list of positions I hold
Anti gun
Pro life
Pro UHC
Pro Immigration
Anti War
Anti Death penalty
Pro financial aid
Pro free schooling through college
Pro Universal income
Pro Adoption (which if it was not so expensive (50K in my state for a baby) I would do after college)
Pro Preventive birth control not the after pill!
I support changing the foster care system to make it easier for good families to keep the child and not move them around every few months
Pro free food for children in school all 3 meals!
I would support Universal Housing if it was a thing
Now tell me is this not PRO LIFE!

and may I ask, how does this have any correlation with what they have said.

What was said was an attempet to get me to basically say that the mothers body is forever slave to the child. While masking the other answer as so you only care about the life of the child pre birth. Then when I tried to clear it up I was told about 100 times you didn't answer the question. So yeah I had to put that list up to show that clearly I am not demeaning and evil over actually willing to do something to stop abortions I can.