Thread: Planned Parenthood is THE Abortion Industry in the US

Originally Posted by OKgrannie

Then don't use the statement that women "don't use protection."

Please quote a post of mine in which I used the statement "women don't use protection." I generally speak about "women WHO don't use protection," but I have never made the absolute statement "women don't use protection."

Originally Posted by OKgrannie

Pro-choice allows people to choose their morals. Pro-life inflicts one standard upon everyone.

Pro choice allows women to play God with human life. Pro-life is exactly as it says--pro-life. We value innocent human life. The pro-life side needs no justification for its values. We are trying to preserve life. Pro-choice values emphasize the importance of being able to make a choice which destroys it. It has no justification.

Originally Posted by OKgrannie

I can know that women will rarely put up a baby for adoption because that is the trend now.

Oh so you know that because "that is the trend now?" Well forgive me if I don't believe that argument of yours. It has no basis of support.

Originally Posted by OKgrannie

Women keep their babies. Those responsible for criminalizing abortion are responsible for causing women's deaths because they KNOW that desperate women will make that choice regardless, knowing this and criminalizing abortion anyway makes the lobbyists responsible.

That's like blaming suicide on anyone who might have slightly "contributed" to a depressed individual's pain--even accidentally. It's no one's fault but their own. If you are truly "pro-choice" as the term is, you should recognize individual choice and the responsibility that comes with it.

Originally Posted by OKgrannie

We should not have laws on the books that merely perform lip service, if a law isn't effective or achieving its purpose, it should be eliminated or replaced.

This is nothing but your opinion. We already have laws in place that are exactly like that, and your argument calls for the overhaul of the entire justice system just because you don't agree with it. That's kind of similar to the claim that pro-life advocates are attempting to "legislate their morality." Your arguments are basically advocating the same thing, just a different morality.

Originally Posted by OKgrannie

Furthermore, we could not afford to imprison all the women who will have illegal abortions IF YOU WERE RIGHT and we could catch and convict them.

Who says we necessarily imprison them? Maybe their carrying to term is enforced, the child placed into the state's care, and then the offender fined heavily. Again, we would only be able to catch some of them, law enforcement does not prevent crime, but we would be able to catch some women making back alley deals and illegal transactions via undercover police work. And if heavy fines were put in place, not only would we not be paying for offenders' imprisonment, the system would probably profit in the long run, especially considering that 43 percent statistic. Fines are just as effective if not more so than imprisonment.

Originally Posted by Locke9-05

Please quote a post of mine in which I used the statement "women don't use protection." I generally speak about "women WHO don't use protection," but I have never made the absolute statement "women don't use protection."

This statement implies that women seeking abortion did not use protection.

Planned Parenthood is THE Abortion Industry in the US
If women are going to engage in unprotected sex

Pro choice allows women to play God with human life. Pro-life is exactly as it says--pro-life. We value innocent human life. The pro-life side needs no justification for its values. We are trying to preserve life. Pro-choice values emphasize the importance of being able to make a choice which destroys it. It has no justification.

Choice preserves freedom of conscience. Choice gives women the control they need to plan their lives. That's adequate justification.

Oh so you know that because "that is the trend now?" Well forgive me if I don't believe that argument of yours. It has no basis of support.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...XtITgS7B1yp55A


Adoption is frequently advocated as a good solution for unwanted pregnancy, particularly by the
anti-abortion movement. Abortion clinics and the pro-choice movement support adoption as a
possible option for women, and they provide information and referrals on adoption to those
considering it. However, very few women facing an unintended pregnancy actually choose to
give up their baby for adoption. Most will choose to keep the baby themselves or terminate the
pregnancy. This paper explains why

That's like blaming suicide on anyone who might have slightly "contributed" to a depressed individual's pain--even accidentally. It's no one's fault but their own. If you are truly "pro-choice" as the term is, you should recognize individual choice and the responsibility that comes with it.
This is nothing but your opinion. We already have laws in place that are exactly like that, and your argument calls for the overhaul of the entire justice system just because you don't agree with it. That's kind of similar to the claim that pro-life advocates are attempting to "legislate their morality." Your arguments are basically advocating the same thing, just a different morality.

When YOU KNOW you are contributing to a certain decision, you bear some responsibility.

Who says we necessarily imprison them? Maybe their carrying to term is enforced, the child placed into the state's care, and then the offender fined heavily. Again, we would only be able to catch some of them, law enforcement does not prevent crime, but we would be able to catch some women making back alley deals and illegal transactions via undercover police work. And if heavy fines were put in place, not only would we not be paying for offenders' imprisonment, the system would probably profit in the long run, especially considering that 43 percent statistic. Fines are just as effective if not more so than imprisonment.

You know the old saying, "You can't get blood out of a turnip"? Most women choosing abortion do so for financial reasons, so most are simply not going to be able to pay fines.

Originally Posted by OKgrannie

This statement implies that women seeking abortion did not use protection.

Way to take that quote very conveniently out of context. The whole quote was: "If women are going to engage in unprotected sex, then refuse to be held accountable for their actions, and attempt to "terminate" the result..." The "ifs" in that statement are conditional to women who engage in unprotected sex. Granted, I don't believe women should be getting abortions even if they use protection during sexual activity, but in that statement, I was clearly referring to those women who engage in unprotected sex.

Originally Posted by OKgrannie

Choice preserves freedom of conscience. Choice gives women the control they need to plan their lives. That's adequate justification.

That's adequate justification for the systematic killing of human life? Perhaps that's the case according to your moral compass.

Originally Posted by OKgrannie

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...XtITgS7B1yp55A


Adoption is frequently advocated as a good solution for unwanted pregnancy, particularly by the
anti-abortion movement. Abortion clinics and the pro-choice movement support adoption as a
possible option for women, and they provide information and referrals on adoption to those
considering it. However, very few women facing an unintended pregnancy actually choose to
give up their baby for adoption. Most will choose to keep the baby themselves or terminate the
pregnancy. This paper explains why

So if most will choose to either keep the baby themselves or terminate the pregnancy, then the viable option in the hypothetical that abortion were made legal would be for her to keep the baby.

Originally Posted by OKgrannie

When YOU KNOW you are contributing to a certain decision, you bear some responsibility.

No you really are not. Contributing factors are not deciding factors. The decision of such an act falls on the individual and the individual alone. Let me ask you a question. Would you say that present day school students who harass and/or bully their peers are responsible for school shootings that may or may not result?

Originally Posted by OKgrannie

You know the old saying, "You can't get blood out of a turnip"? Most women choosing abortion do so for financial reasons, so most are simply not going to be able to pay fines.

Another unsupported assertion. How droll. How are they able to pay for an abortion procedure if they aren't in a very good financial situation.

Correction:

Originally Posted by Locke9-05

So if most will choose to either keep the baby themselves or terminate the pregnancy, then the viable option in the hypothetical that abortion were made legal would be for her to keep the baby.

The red "legal" should have been "illegal." I think most who were following along with the debate know what I meant there, but I wanted to clarify nonetheless.

Originally Posted by Locke9-05

OKGrannie, your arguments continue to make the claim as fact that "making abortion illegal doesn't stop them or reduce the number of them." This is the appeal to history logical fallacy as I have already pointed out. Simply because something did not work the way it was intended in the past at one point in time or even on different occasions throughout history does not logically lead to the conclusion that it never will. I've already responded to that, but your arguments continue to revert back to that claim. I've also suggested forms of enforcement which are far from "draconian," do not invade a woman's bodily privacy in terms of investigation, etc. yet I've received no response. My proposals would treat abortion just like any other illicit market (which obviously is what things turn to once there is no legal market for them). Am I to take it that because you disagree with my overall stance that we are at a stalemate and that your arguments will continue to appeal to history and other fallacious lines of logic?

Not only that, but Guttmacher shows in their data that legalizing abortion dramatically increased the number of abortions commiitted