It's obvious Abortion is wrong

Oh, Grannie....don't you know that men like Maccabee knows what's best for you poor, silly girls?

 

No! No! Surely "Wot sum bloke in der pub sed" is just as valid as a scientific paper?

Anyways everyone knows all scientists are part of a great left wing conspiracy.................

 

It's easy to be against abortion when you know you will never, ever be pregnant.


Regarding complications:

 

Another one bites the dust, another one bites the dust.....isn't that song lyrics....

 

I thought I'd heard it all....but really, now I know that being pregnant is great because you can truly enjoy ice cream. Of course, you can't eat it because of the weight gain, but if you could eat it, it would be great.

 

But for one poster pregnancy is great because you get the Great Prize of ...are ya ready?...STRONGER HAIR !!!!

And isn't that every woman's main goal?

Who cares what pregnancy does to your body, who cares if it can kill you...you get stronger hair......!!!!!

 

Notice how those touting the alleged benefits of pregnancy will never, ever go through it?

 

Notice that there pro life women and our numbers are getting stronger.

 

Are we talking drapes and carpet?

 

Your point is .... ?

 

How does a number get stronger? Americans prefer abortion to be legal......and since Anti-Choicers have no facts/law/science to back up their argument I think facts/law/science and the Constitution will always win out..

 

Really, care to prove that your numbers are getting stronger?

 

Yes I have.

Why? Also have anyone studied the mentality of someone before an abortion?

No it's not the same. A miscarriage doesn't envolves foriegn objects disrupting the womb and dangerous chemicals with side affects.

I'm only forcing women to protect life and to not murder.

I don't. I'm making that point that if we want to be fair then the man shouldn't have to support the child. It's the woman's baby until its borned and then like a snake it turned into "you should support your child". That is sick.

 

I don't deny them. I'm saying that none of them are justifiable for an abortion. And the stronger hair thing was the first thing I could come up with so lay off!

 

Including for context:

The problem with the Finland (and the Denmark) studies is that the researchers selected study groups in parts of the world where prostitution is more common (Did you think it was a coincidence that prostitution is legal in both countries?).

I have nothing against prostitutes, but:
A prostitute is more likely to have an abortion than the typical woman.
A prostitute is more likely to have emotional problems that lead her to choose that occupation (compared to the typical woman).
A prostitute is more likely to encounter contagious diseases, violent individuals, and criminals than the typical woman.

A dishonest researcher who wants to exaggerate the number of deaths and emotional disturbances coincident with abortion would select a population with as many prostitutes as possible, to imply that abortion was responsible for all of the injuries that were actually caused by prostitution. A dishonest researcher would then fail to mention how many women in the study were sex workers.

Take a look at those studies and tell me this. Was the researcher honest enough to publish the size of the population AND the number of prostitutes (or sex workers) included in the population?

 

NO, you have NOT shown a shred of proof that pregnancy doesn't harm women...your opinion does not count...it's only an opinion not a fact.

Abortion isn't murder and yo have no right to force anyone to anything....the rest of your post is garbage.

 

Abortion is legal , women don't need to justify having one..


YES, you denied that women suffer harm from pregnancy.


YOUR words: """Really? Who ever claimed that pregnancy doesn't hurt woman? Everybody has heard of going into labor, morning sickness, and what have you. What we are saying though is the abortion hurts women more so in both short and long term. We are also saying that despite the inconvience its still isn't justified in murdering the unborn. And really do you really think that pro lifers see women as cattle? ""



You described 3 things about pregnancy ("what have you" and now you claim you're not denying all the REAL effects of pregnancy ??!! YOU are calling pregnancy an "inconvenience" despite the looooonnnng list I showed you of the effects of pregnancy and your only response was , "stronger hair"....as if that had anything to do with the legality of abortion ...sweet jaysus!

 

Alright. Then how about this?

http://www.crisismagazine.com/2009/how-abortion-hurts-women-the-hard-evidence

- - - Updated - - -

Abortion is murder. It's the killing of human life without justification.

 

Slavery was legal and slave owners didn't have to justify owning one. Laws are like the wind. They change. So its illogical to argue about what the law seems as legal or not.

No I didn't. I stated that it wasn't enough to be deemed worthy of self defense.

That's not denying that women go through pain.

The long list didnt consist of anything that would be deemed justifiable.

 

Prove it.....

 

Easy to minimize the effects of pregnancy when you know you will never, ever be pregnant, eh?

 

Context: I had explained the obvious dishonesty inherent in a study of abortion in Finland or Denmark, and asked "Was the researcher honest enough to publish the size of the population AND the number of prostitutes (or sex workers) included in the population?"

Since you offered no rebuttal, I assume you agree that the Finland and Denmark studies are dishonest attempts to produce a study that would attribute the other injuries (from a lifestyle of prostitution) to abortion.

Your Catholic magazine article (Crisis Magazine) claims that abortion hurts women, and lists a number of studies (without offering rationale or justification). Let's look at the first paragraph of evidence:
Women who have had abortions suffer an increased risk of anxiety, depression, and suicide. A study published in a 2005 edition of the Journal of Anxiety Disorders found that women who aborted their unintended pregnancies were 30 percent more likely to subsequently report all the symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder than those women who had carried their unintended pregnancies to term. A study of a state-funded medical insurance program in California published in the American Journal of Orthopsychiatry in 2002 showed that the rate of mental health claims for women who aborted was 17 percent higher than those who had carried their children to term. And, according to a 1996 article in the British Medical Journal and a 2002 article in the Southern Medical Journal, the risk of death from suicide is two to six times higher for women who have had abortions when compared, again, with women who have given birth.

The 2005 study in "Journal of Anxiety Disorders" suggests that women who aborted their unintended pregnancies are more likely to have anxiety compared to women who had the resources to keep the baby (It is not a big surprise that women with less money/security/resources had abortions AND have more anxiety than women who have the money/security/resources to support another child. The fact that David Reardon was one of authors leads me to wonder if the questions might have been designed to make the participants feel guilty if they had an abortion. Symptoms of General Anxiety Disorder are:
- restlessness or feeling keyed up or on edge
- being easily fatigued
- difficulty concentrating or mind going blank
- irritability
- muscle tension
- sleep disturbance (difficulty falling or staying asleep, or restless, unsatisfying sleep)
I know people (including guys) who suffer from these symptoms and never had an abortion (but of course the study did not examine a control group - that might have led to a conclusion they did NOT want to see).

The 2002 study in "American Journal of Orthopsychiatry" looks like the study I've already discussed here. They selected Medi-Cal abortions. In effect, they included women on assistance and excluded women who could afford better insurance or pay for the abortion out-of-pocket. They discovered that the same women who could barely afford an abortion were more likely to need mental health assistance compared to women who had the money/security/resources to afford to have another child.

The 1996 article in the "British Medical Journal" (and a later 2002 article) are references to the Finland and Denmark studies that I just discussed. Method: Find a population including prostitutes and then claim the deaths were the result of the abortions instead of the occupation.

If you really think the rest of this Crisis Magazine article has anything of substance, I invite you to track down the author's citation and provide a link here so we can discuss the merits of the study.

 

That's not my point. There's no law to break if I say that abortion is murder and there's no law against convincing someone and therefore preventing such acts.

Again, not my point.

"Judge, I killed my two year old because he gave me the flu and rose my blood pressure". Oh yeah that'll fly.

According to the legal definition. Nazi germany deemed the Jews as not a person.



.

Even if I was callous its better than advocating for the murder of an innocent human. The fact is I realize the side affects but those side affects unless life threatening are not enough for self defense.

None of them did.