If god hates abortion, why make women get pregnant when they don't want to be?

Still does not, in any way whatsoever, mean women should be forced to have children they do not want or cannot afford. Absolutely no correlation between my post and this statement. None!

So, telling men not to treat women as objects is misogyny now?

Then YOU have abortions and feel beautiful...Why should anyone have to do things to feel like you want them to????

Edit: A woman can't be a "manwh-re", you stupid.

 

I'm still a but bleary from celebrations last night, so, I'll try to get at these maybe tomorrow.

However, like I'd told another member, Foxhastings I believe, I generally don't like to go too far off topic in discussions, I'm used to forum moderation that sternly discourages the practice.

But, since the thread's been derailed more than a few times, we'll see where it goes.

Again, not now, or likely tonight, but soon.

 

Yes. The rest of your post was reported to moderators for obvious reasons.

 

Not true. It's a very accurate report. If you can provide evidence to the contrary then
do so.

You provided no reference. Where is it?

Again, not true. I have a very good grip on what free will is and it isn't an illusion.

Murder is never a responsible action. That's a fact and abortion is always murder.

 

Incorrect. Sex education is rampant in government schools.

Once again you failed to provide any evidence. Alas.
Can you provide evidence that abstinence doesn't work? Good grief. Do you want the
truth or do you want to sugar coat it with touchy feely gobble-de-goop? Seriously.

I didn't bring this up but God is definitely real by the very fact that you, or anyone else, are on
this planet. The real problem is that you can't prove that he isn't. This is a huge problem with
those who don't want to admit that God exists.

Please provide evidence that God doesn't exist. Explain abiogenesis. That would be a
good start.

 

That's your problem and irrelevant to the discussion.

Genesis chapter 3. It's all about free will and it's very precise. Your theology teachers
should have been able to show you. There are many places where Jesus (he's God)
tells sinners to repent and follow him. They aren't forced or coerced. They have free
will to decide on their own.

https://gotquestions.org/free-will.html

I did. Enjoy.

 

If you want to you can copy my posts and start another thread where we can debate these things.

 

To be quite perfectly honest, I rather not debate the abortion issue. Circular arguments have never been my cup of tea.

I've made it clear in this thread that I support a woman's right to chose, but that personally, I'm no fan of the actual act.

Now, should you be at all interested in discussing personal responsibility as it relates to the topic at hand, I may or may not be interested in discussing that issue further. I'm not sure if debate would be the correct classification of the action. But anyway, even that, looking through the thread here, seems just as likely to end up a circular argument as well.

Either way, I'll not be delving into anything substantive until well after noon probably, Central time.

Whether or not it's this topic or others, I'm sure we'll have occasion to chat again.

Until then, Ciao.

 

Hate to tell you but liveactionnews has been caught out numerous times lying and doctoring videos to suit their purpose ..

http://archive.jsonline.com/news/opinion/99791324.html
http://articles.latimes.com/print/2009/apr/26/nation/na-abortion26
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/US/02/08/abortion.video.retraining/
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2011/02/04/why-is-live-action-doctoring-its-planned-parent/175992

n a July 20, 2010 press release Live Action accused Planned Parenthood of using "medically inaccurate counseling to convince a young woman to have an abortion" after the counselor tells a patient that the abortion would not impact the ability to have children in the future. Live Action claims that "a previous abortion increased a woman's risk of pre-term birth by 20%."

FACT: According to the Mayo Institute, "only rarely would an abortion cause problems in a subsequent pregnancy", which is a conclusion echoed by every major medical establishment that addresses pregnancy risk.

Lila Rose made medically incorrect statements about birth control and potential links to cancer in her Values Advocacy Council November 2010 speech.

Lila Rose: "...This isn't well known, but birth control causes a lot of physical health problems for women. And this information is being suppressed by the very organizations that pretend to help women. Susan B. Komen, this pro-women, anti-breast cancer organization, gives some of its money to Planned Parenthood which is making more breast cancer by pushing more abortions and birth control — hormonal birth control, on to women."

FACT: According to the National Cancer Institute, studies of a possible link between oral contraceptives and breast cancer have yielded mixed results. A 1998 study by the Women's Contraceptive and Reproductive Experiences (Women's CARE) found that the use of oral contraceptives did not significantly increase a woman's risk for breast cancer. Also, oral contraceptives have been proven to decrease the risk of ovarian and endometrial cancers in women who use oral contraceptives; women also continue to receive this cancer-fighting benefit for years after they stop taking the pill. (Source: National Cancer Institute)

There are plenty more.

Reardon is a graduate of the University of Illinois department of electrical engineering, he achieved his Ph.D in biomedical ethics from Pacific Western University (Hawaii), an unaccredited correspondence school offering no classroom instruction, which was closed in May 2006 following a lawsuit filed by the State of Hawaii. He is the man that coined the phrase post abortion syndrome (PAS) which has been blown to pieces by various actual doctors in the subject of mental health, including Dr. Brenda Major, who has a Ph.D in Social Psychology from Purdue University and is a professor and researcher in the Department of Psychology at the University of California in Santa Barbara (http://www.cmaj.ca/content/168/10/1257.full )

Sorry you have what you think is free-will, if the future is already known then any decisions you make is predetermined in order to achieve that future, any changes to the predetermination means that future does not and cannot exist and as such cannot be known.

Except of course murder is a legal designation and unfortunately for you abortion does not meet the designation of murder, not even in the ten commandments.

 

And wholly inadequate .. Do you even know what comprehensive sex education is?

I have provided the evidence numerous times on numerous threads .. however, I will provide it again just for you.

Sources - Trenholm C, et al., Impacts of Four Title V, Section 510 Abstinence Education Programs Final Report. Princeton, NJ: Mathematic Policy Research; submitted to U.S. Dept. Health & Human Services, Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, 2007.
Hauser D. Five Years of Five Years of Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Education: Assessing the Impact. Washington, DC
Kirby D. Do Abstinence Only Programs Delay the Initiation of Sex Among Young People and Reduce Teen Pregnancy? Washington DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, 2002.

Sources - Santelli J et al. Explaining recent declines in adolescent pregnancy in the United States: the contribution of abstinence and improved contraceptive use. American Journal of Public Health 2007; 97: 3.
Hamilton B et al. Births: Preliminary Data for 2005, [National Vital Statistics Report] Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; December 28, 2006.
Guttmacher Institute. U.S. Teenage Pregnancy Statistics National and State Trends and Trends by Race and Ethnicity. NY: Author, 2006.
National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy. Fact Sheet: How Is the 3 in 10 Statistic Calculated? Washington, DC: Author, 2006
United Nations. Demographic Yearbook. New York: Author, 2004

Here is the research I conducted myself, concerning state teenage pregnancy rates and the sex education taught in the majority of schools in that state.

Top ten states with the highest teenage pregnancy rates - those in red are the ones with predominately abstinence only sex education.

State...........................Birth Rates per 1,000 (15-19)

Arkansas ................................... 39.5
Oklahoma ................................. 38.5
Mississippi ................................ 38
New Mexico .............................. 37.8
Texas ........................................ 37.8
West Virginia ............................ 36.6
Louisiana .................................. 35.8
Kentucky ................................... 35.3
Tennessee ................................. 33
Alabama ................................... 32

Source - https://thenationalcampaign.org/data/compare/1701

States sex education policy

Alabama - Schools are not required by law to provide sex education, but if a school district chooses to offer such courses, the classes must send a message of abstinence until marriage and teach prevention of STDs and HIV/AIDS. The courses do not need to include information about contraception.

Tennessee - Schools are required by law to provide sex education, including information about contraception and abstinence, and other ways to prevent HIV/AIDS and other STDs.

Kentucky - Schools are required by law to provide sex education, including information about abstinence and HIV/AIDS and other STDs.

Louisiana - Schools are not required by law to provide sex education, but if a school district chooses to offer such courses, the classes must include information about abstinence. The schools are not required to provide information about contraception, HIV/AIDS or other STDs.

West Virginia - Schools are required by law to provide sex education, including information about contraception and abstinence, and other ways to prevent HIV/AIDS and other STDs.

Texas - Schools are not required by law to provide sex education, but if a school district chooses to offer such courses, the classes must also teach abstinence until marriage. The law does not require schools to provide information about STDs or HIV/AIDS. But if it is provided, it must include information on abstinence until marriage.

New Mexico - Schools are required by law to provide sex education, including information on abstinence and other ways to prevent HIV/AIDS and other STDs.

Mississippi - Schools are not required by law to provide sex education, but if a school district chooses to offer such courses, the classes must include information about abstinence until marriage and prevention of HIV/AIDS and other STDs. They are not required to provide information on contraception.

Oklahoma - Schools are not required by law to provide general sex education, but they must provide information on abstinence and HIV/AIDS and other STDs. The state does require information on other methods of disease prevention, but not necessarily about contraception.

Arkansas - Schools are not required by law to provide any sex education.

Source - https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/sex-and-hiv-education

The assertion that god exists is a religious one, the onus is on you to prove gods existence, not for me to prove he/she doesn't exist, what you are asking for is a logical fallacy - https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/145/Proving-Non-Existence

http://study.com/academy/lesson/abiogenesis-definition-theory-evidence.html

 

none of the above equates to free will, only the illusion of free will, if as religious people like to think that god knows all, past, present and future then any choices we make have already been predetermined by god due to him/her already knowing the outcome .. if an outcome is known then the choices made are by definition not made of free will, we do not have the capability to change what is already going to happen .. to do so would mean that the future god has seen would not exist and cannot be seen.

 

In what way are they circular arguments?

I don't think anyone is a fan of abortion.

more than happy to oblige on that front. In what way do you think abortion is not taking responsibility?

I'm on GMT time, So no idea how Central time reflects on that.

I hope so, would be good to actually talk to someone who is civil on here.

 

In the fact that it's highly unlikely either of us will change our POV on the issue.

Matters not really, in the vast scheme of things.

You're twisting my statement, which is a sure sign of a discussion turning the 3rd. Bend in a circular argument/discussion/debate. I never said that abortion outright is not taking responsibility. Please at your leisure, re-read my comment.

In the future, we can synchronize our clocks if we find ourselves in a heated discussion/debate.

Thanks.

Anyway, I think that about wraps it up regarding this particular topic for me at least.

Until we chat again, Cheers.

 

Yes. I do. After all I was a school teacher for some time.

You've provided bogus poppycock. A lot of stuff that may impress you but not anything
that matters a hill of beans.

No, the onus is on you. The evidence of God is everywhere and what I'm asking isn't fallacy
at all.

To remind you, you posted the first logical fallacy. Now either put up or shut up and
stop beating about the bush with nonsense.

Seriously, you need to do better than that to make your point.

This article explains nothing as to how abiogenesis came about. Good grief.
In other words you don't understand it nor can you explain it.

 

You've convinced me. You know nothing about freewill. This post is solid evidence.

The future God has seen doesn't yet exist, ergo, freewill is given to us.
Tralfamadore doesn't exist. God's freewill does.

 

That doesn't relate to circular arguments .. it relates to stubbornness.

Am I? The comment I responded to "Now, should you be at all interested in discussing personal responsibility as it relates to the topic at hand", I cannot see how my response of "In what way do you think abortion is not taking responsibility?" (which is a question, not a statement of what you comment means) is "twisting" your statement.

Sounds more like a military operation than a debate lol

Ok, Take care

 

Really, I feel sorry for the kids .. If as you assert you were a school teacher then please post what comprehensive sex education is, according to you.

Ah yes the usual refuge of someone who can't actually refute the evidence offered, instead they ignore it or claim it is "bogus poppycock" or doesn't matter.

No the onus is on the person making the claim, that would be the religious people claiming that god exists.

Really, then you should absolutely no problem detailing it .. please do .. oh and with the relevant reliable proof to support it please.

Utter bollocks as usual.

You did not ask "how abiogenesis came about", good grief do you even know what you write .. you wrote "Explain abiogenesis." : Post #433, now you want to move the goalposts .. yet another fallacy for you.

From the link I supplied "Abiogenesis is a scientific theory which states that life arose on Earth via spontaneous natural means due to conditions present at the time. In other words, life came from non-living matter. "

 

That comment above shows how little you actually know ... the very action of god knowing/seeing the future causes that future to exist, try looking up the double-slit experiment, you might learn something.

 

Your theories on parallel universes and timelines do nothing to address the question.

Fact is, you know your choice was made of free will; the fact that I observed your chaise does noting to change that.
The fact that your choice was made of free will does not change when I go back to a previous point in time.

 

If there is a god, how would he "make" a woman pregnant? The man does that. Plus, doesn't god not intervene with free will? Wouldn't god by a hypocrite if he did?

 

It's just a straw man argument from the OP. Either that or he's accusing God of being a serial rapist.
Except in a rape, no one is forcing the woman to have sex. No one is forcing the woman not to use contraceptives or have her tubes tired.
You play the hand you're dealt without blaming the dealer.

 

The OP argument makes no sense. Like, literally, it doesn't make sense.

 

I didn't change the question, you just don't understand the answer .. no worries, ignorance is bliss as they say.

 

Great, next time you drive a car and have an accident that is your fault please ensure you "You play the hand you're dealt without blaming the dealer." and don't go seeking medical treatment.

None of which is relevant as consenting to sexual intercourse is not consenting to pregnancy.

 

Yawn.
Fact is, you know your choice was made of free will; the fact that I observed your chaise does noting to change that.
The fact that your choice was made of free will does not change when I go back to a previous point in time.