The hypocrisy of being "pro-life"

coffee4u · Feb 15, 2020

ChristianForCats said:
mothers are not harmed at abortion clinics.

You must be kidding?

Even the Mayo clinic lists risks
Medical abortion - Mayo Clinic
Risks to fertility Yes, Abortion Can Cause Infertility
Death from legally obtained abortion Fatal hemorrhage from legal abortion in the United States. - PubMed - NCBI
Deaths from abortions U.S. 1973-2015 | Statista
The number is low but that doesn't make it any less tragic to those women and their families.

Mark Quayle · Feb 15, 2020

ChristianForCats said:
Contraception is a form of abortion, especially the morning after pills (Plan B)

If the morning after pills are "especially" a form of abortion, then the other kinds of contraception are not "especially" so. You destroy your own argument.

redleghunter · Feb 15, 2020

Silmarien said:
And people want to do away with minimum sentences.

Worse in some states they want to and have decriminalized certain assaults and theft.

Kaon · Feb 15, 2020

ChristianForCats said:
Over and over again so-called "pro-lifers" say two things that butt against each other:

Contraception is a form of abortion, especially the morning after pills (Plan B).

There is no reason to have an abortion because women can use contraception.

Uh, what? People want women to prevent unwanted pregnancies but not use the devices which were invented solely for that purpose. You can't have it both ways. If you do not want anybody to use contraception, you must love abortions of unwanted embryos and fetuses because using contraceptive pills and devices prevents them.

I also have seen "pro-lifers" speak out against mandatory sex education, which is the only way to make sure all girls and boys learn about contraception and abstinence. Again, if you want all girls and women to avoid having unwanted pregnancies, you must support this requirement for health teachers in every public and private school.

Reducing abortions will not happen by making them illegal. All that would do is make most abortions very dangerous, even life-threatening. It will not reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. If you want the number of abortions to be nearly zero you must support everything that would effectively reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies because desperate women will seek untrained people to remove fetuses out of their bodies.

So what do you want, fewer unwanted pregnancies or a lot of sick women occupying jail cells?

Interesting point.

I am pro-life, but I do not believe in contraceptive because I think marriage is the actual sexual union between two people. In other words, I am an opponent of multiple sexual partners - and a proponent of sexual intercourse with the person one believes one will be with forever. The consequence of "raw" sex is possible conception of a child - that is how it works between a cis-man and cis-woman. It is not necessary to have multiple sex partners and all interactions be unprotected: a possible consequence is the conception of a child.

But, everyone chooses their own way. I am honestly not judging, just giving perspective.

Tom 1 · Feb 15, 2020

ChristianForCats said:
Over and over again so-called "pro-lifers" say two things that butt against each other:

Contraception is a form of abortion, especially the morning after pills (Plan B).

There is no reason to have an abortion because women can use contraception.

Uh, what? People want women to prevent unwanted pregnancies but not use the devices which were invented solely for that purpose. You can't have it both ways. If you do not want anybody to use contraception, you must love abortions of unwanted embryos and fetuses because using contraceptive pills and devices prevents them.

I also have seen "pro-lifers" speak out against mandatory sex education, which is the only way to make sure all girls and boys learn about contraception and abstinence. Again, if you want all girls and women to avoid having unwanted pregnancies, you must support this requirement for health teachers in every public and private school.

Reducing abortions will not happen by making them illegal. All that would do is make most abortions very dangerous, even life-threatening. It will not reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. If you want the number of abortions to be nearly zero you must support everything that would effectively reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies because desperate women will seek untrained people to remove fetuses out of their bodies.

So what do you want, fewer unwanted pregnancies or a lot of sick women occupying jail cells?

It's become a 'this or nothing' rallying call for some groups of voters over there it seems. It's easy to see why, it is a very straightforward issue that doesn't on the face of it appear to require explanation. It's a bit like the black and white views that led to prohibition maybe. I think often we want something we don't like just to go away, and don't want to think through all of the possible complications and how it might affect anyone else.

SamanthaAnastasia · Feb 15, 2020

ChristianForCats said:
Over and over again so-called "pro-lifers" say two things that butt against each other:

Contraception is a form of abortion, especially the morning after pills (Plan B).

There is no reason to have an abortion because women can use contraception.

Uh, what? People want women to prevent unwanted pregnancies but not use the devices which were invented solely for that purpose. You can't have it both ways. If you do not want anybody to use contraception, you must love abortions of unwanted embryos and fetuses because using contraceptive pills and devices prevents them.

I also have seen "pro-lifers" speak out against mandatory sex education, which is the only way to make sure all girls and boys learn about contraception and abstinence. Again, if you want all girls and women to avoid having unwanted pregnancies, you must support this requirement for health teachers in every public and private school.

Reducing abortions will not happen by making them illegal. All that would do is make most abortions very dangerous, even life-threatening. It will not reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. If you want the number of abortions to be nearly zero you must support everything that would effectively reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies because desperate women will seek untrained people to remove fetuses out of their bodies.

So what do you want, fewer unwanted pregnancies or a lot of sick women occupying jail cells?

I don’t believe in abortion but I can’t force anyone to believe the same as me. We’re not of this world. All I can do is with love state why I disagree personally and not judge the women who choose abortion.

Jamdoc · Feb 15, 2020

redleghunter said:
True. But a question...what did the child in the womb do to get terminated?

That's why I'm torn about it. I would like for a way to have the child live but the woman not have to bear the child, if it were possible.

coffee4u · Feb 15, 2020

Jamdoc said:
That's why I'm torn about it. I would like for a way to have the child live but the woman not have to bear the child, if it were possible.

Since doctors have not even studied or looked into saving an ectopic pregnancy -as they would do if they viewed all life as precious-this has not been looked at either. The closest would be where embryos have been frozen and used by another woman.
It would certainly have to be very early on to donate your embryo.
Donating Frozen Embryos
But extracting an early pregnancy and having it be donated should be an avenue of research since this would accomplish that very thing. The mother not having to go through pregnancy or bear the child and the embryo given a chance at life.

GaveMeJoy · Feb 15, 2020

ChristianForCats said:
Over and over again so-called "pro-lifers" say two things that butt against each other:

Contraception is a form of abortion, especially the morning after pills (Plan B).

There is no reason to have an abortion because women can use contraception.

Uh, what? People want women to prevent unwanted pregnancies but not use the devices which were invented solely for that purpose. You can't have it both ways. If you do not want anybody to use contraception, you must love abortions of unwanted embryos and fetuses because using contraceptive pills and devices prevents them.

I also have seen "pro-lifers" speak out against mandatory sex education, which is the only way to make sure all girls and boys learn about contraception and abstinence. Again, if you want all girls and women to avoid having unwanted pregnancies, you must support this requirement for health teachers in every public and private school.

Reducing abortions will not happen by making them illegal. All that would do is make most abortions very dangerous, even life-threatening. It will not reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. If you want the number of abortions to be nearly zero you must support everything that would effectively reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies because desperate women will seek untrained people to remove fetuses out of their bodies.

So what do you want, fewer unwanted pregnancies or a lot of sick women occupying jail cells?

Hello,
While it might not be right, and might result in back alley abortions and other undesirable side affects, it’s an absolute fact that making abortions illegal would result in substantially fewer abortions, by a large margin. In the United States, there is a highly disproportionate amount of abortions among the poor and minorities in urban areas. If abortions are highly restricted or prohibited, all of the facilities that offer them currently would have to shut down. This would make obtaining an abortion more expensive, make doctors willing to perform the procedure more difficult to find and require the type of resources (including personal connections in the medical field and transportation) that many people getting abortions currently just don’t have.

If you would like to discuss the merits of making abortion illegal that’s fine, but You can’t dispute the fact that it would substantially reduce the overall number of abortions.

GaveMeJoy · Feb 15, 2020

Jamdoc said:
That's why I'm torn about it. I would like for a way to have the child live but the woman not have to bear the child, if it were possible.

There is a waitlist a mile long in every single major American city of married couples who want nothing more than to adopt a child, and they end up having to go through expensive foreign adoptions because so many women choose to have their babies removed from their womb in pieces. I think adoption could be a way to make something sad (unwanted pregnancy) become something beautiful (happy family).

Jamdoc · Feb 15, 2020

coffee4u said:
Since doctors have not even studied or looked into saving an ectopic pregnancy -as they would do if they viewed all life as precious-this has not been looked at either. The closest would be where embryos have been frozen and used by another woman.
It would certainly have to be very early on to donate your embryo.
Donating Frozen Embryos
But extracting an early pregnancy and having it be donated should be an avenue of research since this would accomplish that very thing. The mother not having to go through pregnancy or bear the child and the embryo given a chance at life.

I would like that, to somehow save an innocent child but not punish a woman for a crime committed against her.

Jamdoc · Feb 15, 2020

GaveMeJoy said:
There is a waitlist a mile long in every single major American city of married couples who want nothing more than to adopt a child, and they end up having to go through expensive foreign adoptions because so many women choose to have their babies removed from their womb in pieces. I think adoption could be a way to make something sad (unwanted pregnancy) become something beautiful (happy family).

doesn't solve the problem of the woman having a physical reminder every day bare minimum the pregnancy term of the violent act committed against her. I have to say, I'm glad I'm not a woman and have to worry about that. I don't think I could handle it. Birth is also very painful and can have complications that can last for life. That's a lot to ask of a woman who said "no" and had it all forced on her.

Kenny'sID · Feb 15, 2020

ChristianForCats said:
Over and over again so-called "pro-lifers" say two things that butt against each other:

Contraception is a form of abortion, especially the morning after pills (Plan B).

There is no reason to have an abortion because women can use contraception.

Right off the bat, that is simply, at least for the most part, just not true. There may be a few that say that, but I bet you can't show me a single one.

If I said something like that, I'd consider it an admission of being stupid, and though that may be true, I don't want to advertise it any more than necessary.

Hazelelponi · Feb 15, 2020

Jamdoc said:
I would like that, to somehow save an innocent child but not punish a woman for a crime committed against her.

Pregnancy isn't a punishment - it's the woman's flesh and blood as much as it's the man's - it is her child she is murdering.

If she doesn't want the child adoption is a viable option.

Steve97 · Feb 15, 2020

SkyWriting said:
(That's not "speaking only for yourself" at all.)

Please read and think before you respond. This opinion is shared by other pro-life thinkers. I am speaking for myself on this thread.

JacksBratt · Feb 15, 2020

ChristianForCats said:
Over and over again so-called "pro-lifers" say two things that butt against each other:

Contraception is a form of abortion, especially the morning after pills (Plan B).

There is no reason to have an abortion because women can use contraception.

Glad you said "so called" because:

1/ I am a "pro Life" and I do not consider the morning after pill an option
2/ You cannot make statements that you consider fact when there is no basis for it.
3/ Plan B does not prevent conception.

JacksBratt · Feb 15, 2020

Kaon said:
Interesting point.

I am pro-life, but I do not believe in contraceptive because I think marriage is the actual sexual union between two people. In other words, I am an opponent of multiple sexual partners - and a proponent of sexual intercourse with the person one believes one will be with forever. The consequence of "raw" sex is possible conception of a child - that is how it works between a cis-man and cis-woman. It is not necessary to have multiple sex partners and all interactions be unprotected: a possible consequence is the conception of a child.

But, everyone chooses their own way. I am honestly not judging, just giving perspective.

What is "cis" man and "cis" woman?

Jermayn · Feb 15, 2020

ChristianForCats said:
Over and over again so-called "pro-lifers" say two things that butt against each other:

Contraception is a form of abortion, especially the morning after pills (Plan B).

There is no reason to have an abortion because women can use contraception.

Uh, what? People want women to prevent unwanted pregnancies but not use the devices which were invented solely for that purpose. You can't have it both ways. If you do not want anybody to use contraception, you must love abortions of unwanted embryos and fetuses because using contraceptive pills and devices prevents them.

I also have seen "pro-lifers" speak out against mandatory sex education, which is the only way to make sure all girls and boys learn about contraception and abstinence. Again, if you want all girls and women to avoid having unwanted pregnancies, you must support this requirement for health teachers in every public and private school.

Reducing abortions will not happen by making them illegal. All that would do is make most abortions very dangerous, even life-threatening. It will not reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. If you want the number of abortions to be nearly zero you must support everything that would effectively reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies because desperate women will seek untrained people to remove fetuses out of their bodies.

So what do you want, fewer unwanted pregnancies or a lot of sick women occupying jail cells?

Biblical answer:
Have sex only with your spouse.
Problem solved.

Josheb · Feb 15, 2020

ChristianForCats said:
Over and over again so-called "pro-lifers" say two things that butt against each other:

Contraception is a form of abortion, especially the morning after pills (Plan B).

There is no reason to have an abortion because women can use contraception.

That is just plain unadulterated ignorance.

Most prolifers are not supportive of the "morning after" pill, or any contraception that destroys a fertilized egg, and many contraception methods prevent fertilization, not simply implantation. You need to become better informed.

Likewise, most Christians are not opposed to sex ed. They are opposed to the type of sex ed that is often taught in public schools. Big difference. Again, you need to become better informed.

coffee4u · Feb 15, 2020

JacksBratt said:
What is "cis" man and "cis" woman?

Means you are the gender assigned at birth, fancy new terms for this crazy new world.

The hypocrisy of being "pro-life"

Well-Known Member

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist

Thank You Jesus!

Well-Known Member

Optimistic sceptic

Just a library lady

Watching and Praying Always

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Watching and Praying Always

Watching and Praying Always

Well-Known Member

:sighing:

Active Member

Searching for Truth

Searching for Truth

Well-Known Member

Christian

Well-Known Member

Similar threads