Liberals, abortion questionnaire for you?

I

Ian

New member
T or F - When a woman has an abortion she is taking a person's future away.

Answer: True.

T or F - Killing a person is the same as taking his or her future away.

Answer: True.

Can you connect the dots?


- Pro-Life.
So a unborn baby "magically" becomes a person right after it was born? Oh, that makes a lot of sense. What's the difference between a the baby one minute before it was born and one minute after, not much. Plus it's not a part of a woman's body. It's genetically unique and human by nature.
If it is part of the woman, then does the woman have four arms, four legs, two heads, and four eyes? See the illogic of your argument?
@isurvived it's ironic how much you sound like Hitler trying to clean the human race of Jews.

And still, no one has yet to satisfactorily refute my original post. Everybody pretty much went on their own rants.
"It doesn't matter what you say. The Supreme Court (a higher authority than you) has ruled this to be a privacy issue, and that women have the right to choose. There are far fewer abortions performed now than there were 20 years ago."

- Yeah, the Supreme Court once said slavery was okay. Just because they say something doesn't make it right.

"If abortions were to become illegal, they would not stop. They would be performed by unlicensed practitioners, and become a racket for gangs and organized crime."

- So? Still doesn't justify the legal killing of unborn babies.

"For the record, if my wife and I were to conceive, we would never choose abortion, unless my wife's life were in danger, and it was medically recommended as a last resort."

- What makes your wife's life superior to the unborn child? If anything the child is innocent and free of sins, while your wife is not.

How about you guys actually answer this question (and not dodge around and go on your own rants). If a fetus is not human or a person, what is it?
 
It doesn't matter what you say. The Supreme Court (a higher authority than you) has ruled this to be a privacy issue, and that women have the right to choose. There are far fewer abortions performed now than there were 20 years ago.

If abortions were to become illegal, they would not stop. They would be performed by unlicensed practitioners, and become a racket for gangs and organized crime.

For the record, if my wife and I were to conceive, we would never choose abortion, unless my wife's life were in danger, and it was medically recommended as a last resort.
 
Answering your own questions...what is the question for us?

Abortion does not kill a person or baby. Abortion terminates a zygote, embryo, or fetus. A fetus BECOMES a baby when birthed by its mother. "Personhood" is not conferred upon zygotes, embryos, or fetuses.

Prior to Roe v. Wade, the wealthy could easily find a doctor to conveniently arrange a "miscarriage" to take care of their pregnancy "problem" while the middle class and poor had to resort to back-alley abortions, which resulted in the deaths of many mothers. If abortion is restricted, the wealthy will still get their doctor-approved miscarriages while the middle class and poor bear unwanted children.

So you prefer to take away a woman's right to control her own body and then forcibly turn her into a baby factory. What a brave new world you envision.
 
Yes, she is taking the life of a future serial killer away. Or a rapist, or robber, or wife beater, or child molester.

Go, abortion.

She is saving the future of many others in doing so.
 
You're first clause is highly debatable. Is a fetus a person? If so, do you want a fetus born into a family where it isn't wanted? Why should the government tell a woman what she can or can't do with her own body?
 
Back
Top