pro life ad's in georgia

firstdown · 02-12-2010, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by firstdown

You have said you are for a one payer health care system and that will not give us a choice so it seems you pick and choose the right of choice.

Saden I guess you don't want to reply to this because your choice thing does not hold water.

saden1 · 02-12-2010, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by firstdown

Saden I guess you don't want to reply to this because your choice thing does not hold water.

I choose single payer for selfish reasons...I believe it saves me money in the long run..I'm worried about my bottom dollar...some skank aborting her baby doesnt impact my pocket.

firstdown · 02-12-2010, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saden1

I choose single payer for selfish reasons...I believe it saves me money in the long run..I'm worried about my bottom dollar...some skank aborting her baby doesnt impact my pocket.

So when its all said and done you only believe in choice when in benifits you.

CRedskinsRule · 02-12-2010, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saden1

I choose single payer for selfish reasons...I believe it saves me money in the long run..I'm worried about my bottom dollar...some skank aborting her baby doesnt impact my pocket.

It's interesting that you care so little about a baby whose birth is foreseeable in the short term - less than 9 months. But when the discussion on the end of the world was going on, you stated that the death of those in the far distant future should be a frightening prospect to us now.

But the skank who has an abortion, and the baby that would have been, don't get that same heart ache response.
http://www.thewarpath.net/parking-lo...tml#post553394 (Life After People (History Channel))

Quote:

Suppose I tell you that 90% of Americans will die of a mutated swine flu a month from now. Would this new found knowledge frighten you? My hearth aches at the thought and I can't help it. This is a normal and expected reaction. Indifference which is essential your position is not acceptable. If we all die off tomorrow, a month, a year, millions of years, or billions of years from now it's all the same. The grim demise of mankind and even the universe at large should be a frighting prospect irrespective of timetable or and lack of control.
...

Almost 1 million babies a year are not born due to abortions, granted that's not 90%, but the abortion to live birth ratio, as of 2001, was 246 abortions for every 1000 live births, us_abortion_statistics, certainly not a number to be discounted.

I googled, and used those statistics, looks like a pro-life site, so they are probably skewed high, but the point is valid if the number is ballparked

Trample the Elderly · 02-12-2010, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

It's interesting that you care so little about a baby whose birth is foreseeable in the short term - less than 9 months. But when the discussion on the end of the world was going on, you stated that the death of those in the far distant future should be a frightening prospect to us now.

But the skank who has an abortion, and the baby that would have been, don't get that same heart ache response.
http://www.thewarpath.net/parking-lo...tml#post553394 (Life After People (History Channel))

Almost 1 million babies a year are not born due to abortions, granted that's not 90%, but the abortion to live birth ratio, as of 2001, was 246 abortions for every 1000 live births, us_abortion_statistics, certainly not a number to be discounted.

I googled, and used those statistics, looks like a pro-life site, so they are probably skewed high, but the point is valid if the number is ballparked

Don't bother. He thinks he's better than everyone else.

CRedskinsRule · 02-12-2010, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

Don't bother. He thinks he's better than everyone else.

I know but the stark contrast was interesting to me.

Monkeydad · 02-12-2010, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlmdub130

saw this on the news this morning and i think it is wrong on so many levels. i don't understand how these were even allowed, i would be outraged if they were in my town. i don't see how anyone in their right mind could think these ad's were done tastefully, there are much better ways to go about the pro-life, pro-choice debate. i thought the commercial during the super bowl was done with a lot more class and respect than these things.

Anti-Abortion Billboards on Race Split Opinion in Atlanta - NYTimes.com

for the record i am pro-abortion

Like in the Campbell thread, the stats don't lie. It's a tragedy that we can't talk about because of the PC-Police, but it could be helped with some education about it. Like it or not, there are some severe family issues in the black community. Abortions ARE sky high. So is the percentage of fatherless kids who are allowed to live. The welfare budgets do go primarily to urban areas too, where the crime rates are rising due to..guess what, the breakdown of the nuclear family with both a father and mother.

tryfuhl · 02-13-2010, 12:21 AM

I think that they say 72pct of black kids are born out of wedlock; I don't think that marriage is absolutely necessary to display commitment or have children, but it's a telling statistic overall compared to whites at 28pct and latinas are a bit high at 51pct as well.

saden1 · 02-16-2010, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

It's interesting that you care so little about a baby whose birth is foreseeable in the short term - less than 9 months. But when the discussion on the end of the world was going on, you stated that the death of those in the far distant future should be a frightening prospect to us now.

But the skank who has an abortion, and the baby that would have been, don't get that same heart ache response.
http://www.thewarpath.net/parking-lo...tml#post553394 (Life After People (History Channel))

Almost 1 million babies a year are not born due to abortions, granted that's not 90%, but the abortion to live birth ratio, as of 2001, was 246 abortions for every 1000 live births, us_abortion_statistics, certainly not a number to be discounted.

I googled, and used those statistics, looks like a pro-life site, so they are probably skewed high, but the point is valid if the number is ballparked

If you're going to cite statistics why not just go with the CDC?
By your admission ("granted it's not 90%") you can not compare the death of 90% of Americans and the near extinction of human population to a few million abortions.
If I have to worry about the death of bunch of cells (that's what a fetus is for the first 4 months, I mean it can't think, it can't talk, it's an attachment to a woman's body that can't do anything) I'd be depressed about all the spermicide I've been committing all these years.

TTL, it's not that I think I'm better than everyone else, it's just that I think you people half-ass everything. With you being at the top of the leader-board of course.

saden1 · 02-16-2010, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by firstdown

So when its all said and done you only believe in choice when in benifits you.

That's one factor in many. Obviously if someone comes to me with firstdown's stolen boat and tries to sell it to me I'll choose to let you know your boat has been stolen. My choice is based on my moral compass.

Monkeydad · 02-16-2010, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saden1

If you're going to cite statistics why not just go with the CDC?
By your admission ("granted it's not 90%") you can not compare the death of 90% of Americans and the near extinction of human population to a few million abortions.
If I have to worry about the death of bunch of cells (that's what a fetus is for the first 4 months, I mean it can't think, it can't talk, it's an attachment to a woman's body that can't do anything) I'd be depressed about all the spermicide I've been committing all these years.

TTL, it's not that I think I'm better than everyone else, it's just that I think you people half-ass everything. With you being at the top of the leader-board of course.

Disgusting line of thought and completely untrue. It's a live person, not a potential person or "fetus", it's just a human being who needs to be nurtured. If we follow your line of thinking (and Hitler's), every handicapped and elderly person should also be exterminated because they need help and care to live. This casual disregard for the value of life itself will be the downfall of our society.

firstdown · 02-16-2010, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saden1

That's one factor in many. Obviously if someone comes to me with firstdown's stolen boat and tries to sell it to me I'll choose to let you know your boat has been stolen. My choice is based on my moral compass.

Ok Saden I'm not going to get into the abortion thing because it been done before but using the terms "pro choice" and "moral compass" together to decribe how you picked pro choice was pretty funny.

CRedskinsRule · 02-16-2010, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saden1

If you're going to cite statistics why not just go with the CDC?
By your admission ("granted it's not 90%") you can not compare the death of 90% of Americans and the near extinction of human population to a few million abortions.
If I have to worry about the death of bunch of cells (that's what a fetus is for the first 4 months, I mean it can't think, it can't talk, it's an attachment to a woman's body that can't do anything) I'd be depressed about all the spermicide I've been committing all these years.

TTL, it's not that I think I'm better than everyone else, it's just that I think you people half-ass everything. With you being at the top of the leader-board of course.

1) OK here is CDC's result:

Quote:

The national legal induced abortion ratio increased from 196 per 1,000 live births in 1973 (the first year that 52 areas reported) to 358 per 1,000 in 1979 and remained nearly stable through 1981 (Figure 1; Table 2). The ratio peaked at 364 per 1,000 in 1984 and since then has demonstrated a generally steady decline. In 2002, the abortion ratio was 246 per 1,000 in 49 reporting areas (the same as in 2001) and 248 for the same 48 reporting areas for which data were available since 1998 (Table 2).

So, though it was a pro-life site, their stats were correct.

2) Your statement was that you don't care for the one skank, and a life that is formed and will be born barring an abortion, but the thought of unformed uncreated life a billion years from now makes your heart ache. The dichotomy of your position is simple, and shows you to be heartless to those around you who you value as lesser beings.

3) It is a bunch of cells dependent on the host body, the mom, you are correct, but it is living and growing, your example of spermicide is blatantly a false comparison, spermicide acts before the egg has been fertilized and begun to cluster and divide as cells.

rationalize as you will, but before you start commenting about half ass retorts, realize half-ass is better than an empty response like your last one.

over the mountain · 02-16-2010, 03:16 PM

YouTube - Bring Out Your Dead (Monty Python and the Holy Grail)

saden1 · 02-16-2010, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

1) OK here is CDC's result:
So, though it was a pro-life site, their stats were correct.

2) Your statement was that you don't care for the one skank, and a life that is formed and will be born barring an abortion, but the thought of unformed uncreated life a billion years from now makes your heart ache. The dichotomy of your position is simple, and shows you to be heartless to those around you who you value as lesser beings.

3) It is a bunch of cells dependent on the host body, the mom, you are correct, but it is living and growing, your example of spermicide is blatantly a false comparison, spermicide acts before the egg has been fertilized and begun to cluster and divide as cells.

rationalize as you will, but before you start commenting about half ass retorts, realize half-ass is better than an empty response like your last one.

1. I posted a link to the CDC site so your stats actually have weight...I do read what I post.

2. It's not that I think they are lesser beings, it's that I don't think they are beings for the first few months. Yes, I am more concerned about the existence of human beings in the future than I am of fetuses getting aborted. There's nothing contradictory between the two positions.

3. Growing? Yes, living? No. Their lives are not discernible from that of the host mothers. She dies, they die...she eats, they eat.

It's not rationalizing, it's simple logic devoid of personal beliefs. And for the record, abortion isn't for me and my wife...and I certainly don't support abortion after 5 months unless there's an extraneous circumstance.

02-13-2010, 12:21 AM	#38
tryfuhl Gamebreaker Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Waldorf, MD Age: 29 Posts: 12,512	Re: pro life ad's in georgia I think that they say 72pct of black kids are born out of wedlock; I don't think that marriage is absolutely necessary to display commitment or have children, but it's a telling statistic overall compared to whites at 28pct and latinas are a bit high at 51pct as well.

02-16-2010, 03:16 PM	#44
over the mountain Playmaker Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: baltimore Posts: 2,666	Re: pro life ad's in georgia YouTube - Bring Out Your Dead (Monty Python and the Holy Grail) __________________ Fails to lock onto the defender, at times, preferring to violently shove his target to the ground and look for others.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

pro life ad's in georgia

Debating with the enemy