We exist, FYI. Some of us are even pro-life.

ND HB 1572 FTW!!!

Tags: 1572, abortion, hb, pro-life

Views: 1353

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

wait, are you saying some people are anti-abortion and not pro-life?
either way, can you state you case?
Yeah, I want to hear your reasoning if you dont mind, just curious.
Libertarians for Life (l4l.org) does a wonderful job at arguing for prenatal rights from an entirely secular an libertarian viewpoint. They are very thorough; any arguments I'd use could be found there.
Uh, the Libertarian Party is hands off--that is, pro-choice. Or, at least it was until all the disaffected conservatives hijacked it.
Some people believe the two terms are not synonymous, and most logisticians would likely agree.

"True" pro-lifers perhaps believe in: 1) anti-abortion in all cases, even in the case of rape, incest, woman's health, etc., 2) no dealth-penalty, and 3) anti-war. Each of these examples is a man killing another man.

I have never met anyone like this. Most people who claim to be "pro-life" are only against the first option.

An anti-abortionist would simply be someone who is anti-abortion (in all cases), or perhaps only against abortion when used as a contraceptive, but believes in the death penalty and/or in war.

More people are "anti-abortionists" and fewer people are "pro-lifers," respectively. Also, someone can be pro-choice, but anti-abortion! Wrap your head around that one.

Hope that helps!
Exactly! I am against abortion except as a last resort to save the mother's life, am against ALL war, and am anti-death penalty.

One can be pro-choice and anti-abortion. I am a fan of liberty, but I don't, for instance, support the right to choose to rob a bank.
Oh, and why is incest so often lumped in with rape? If the incest wasn't consentual, it falls under "rape", no other category needed. If it was consentual, what's the problem? Birth defects? That falls under "fetal deformity".
Incest packs more punch than "fetal deformity." Also, children who are born of relatives won't always be deformed. The parents who later find out they are related may simply want to terminate the pregnancy.
Yeah.. so would a person who got a bad amino test. I think it should still fall under fetal deformity.
Or rape.
Whatever the case might be.
Again....children conceived from two related people will not necessarily be deformed, so the "fetal deformity" concept alone is bankrupt.

AND when arguing FOR abortions in the rare case category, "fetal deformity" would not go over well with the pro-lifers. "So what a baby is deformed, we should just automatically get rid of it?" My argument would be, "Well yes in the case of incest!"
Sooo... you think it's ok for a dad to have sex with his daughter if he talks her into saying "yes"?? Or even an older brother? Or do you mean as long as both parties are "adults"?
You are either:
1) Equating robbery with ending a pregnancy
or
2) Comparing apples and oranges.
Please clarify?

As posted below.. I rather agree with you there. What is with the incest thing, anyway?

RSS

Blog Posts

Aftermath

Posted by Belle Rose on September 20, 2014 at 2:42am 0 Comments

PI = 4

Posted by _Robert_ on September 16, 2014 at 8:53pm 5 Comments

Ads

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service