Abortion Discussion

[SteveB28]

I have. 37% participation rate of available samples. Of the 37%, 85% filled out first session questionnaires. The drop out rate increases from there.

Study conducted over a three year period. Other studies cited on this thread show women with regrets later than three years.

Also the source of your study is biased for the abortion lobby.

The 'drop out rate' was 7%. And, had you read thoroughly, you would have noted that the author used a well-known statistical tool which compensates for those missing data points. Are you at all familiar with the aOR mechanism in statistical analysis?

The only people criticising this study's reliability are those whose prejudiced opinions are refuted by its findings!

 

[SteveB28]

Lots of time on your hands, I see. One study. I'd bet there's studies out there, just as unbiased as yours, that refute your conclusion.

87 year olds frequently do have some time for various pursuits.

And you'd lose that bet.

 

[civilwarbuff]

I've already pointed out that it was ratified by the US Senate. Treaties are given the weight of law upon ratification.

I got no time for someone who can't connect the dots.....go back and read the posts....

 

[SteveB28]

Yes, thanks to the tireless efforts of pro-lifers, but it is still over a million a year. It was 700,000 back in 1975.

No. Thanks to better, widespread education in sexual reproduction. Which many of you lot have tried to impede at every step!

 

[SteveB28]

The study seems to be implying that all of these women have one of the traits that describes a sociopath... Now I don't know what circles you run in maybe all of the people you know have those traits. But the people that run in mine all seem to regret doing dumb things, so this is why I'm having a big problem accepting the accuracy of the study...

I'm not sure where your fallacy falls here. I can see arguments from ignorance, incredulity, ad hominem........that's quite a collection in just one paragraph!

Now if you had done the study it would lend more credence to it and explain why you believe it, but it appears that you didn't. So the stone I'm throwing is that I wonder how can you believe it???

What!?

Guess what......I didn't "do" any of the studies that have resulted in improved blood pressure medication either......but I still take them! And (this will no doubt amaze you) they work!

 

[Uncle Siggy]

I'm not sure where your fallacy falls here. I can see arguments from ignorance, incredulity, ad hominem........that's quite a collection in just one paragraph!

What!?

Guess what......I didn't "do" any of the studies that have resulted in improved blood pressure medication either......but I still take them! And (this will no doubt amaze you) they work!

You're trying to sell swamp land and are upset that nobody is buying any, should that surprise you???

 

[Uncle Siggy]

No, it is just a term that shows pro-aborts are killing babies and not "clumps of cells"

And don't want to admit it...

 

[Archivist]

I got no time for someone who can't connect the dots.....go back and read the posts....

I've read the posts.

 

[Radrook]

Yes, let us keep adding details to our 'story' until it matches the point we are desperately trying to reach!

I sincerely remembered that detail at the moment I said I remembered it. If I had remembered it at the time I posted I would have immediately added it. But since it happened when I was five years old, it didn't immediately come to mind. But the solution is obvious. If it really bothers that much, just accuse me of deceit and ignore it. As simple as that. Ultimately, I neither gain nor lose from your trust since fortunately my judge is God.

 

[Uncle Siggy]

I'd bet there's studies out there, just as unbiased as yours, that refute your conclusion.

I'd bet there's studies out there, just as unbiased as yours, that refute your political ideology.

There fixed it...

 

[Uncle Siggy]

I probably missed this but what journal was this published in? Journal name, year and volume would be a big help. Many of these are now on line unless they are ancient......just point me to the post#.....

I wouldn't worry about it, I don't think anybody really cares other than him...

 

[civilwarbuff]

I've read the posts.

OK, then go back and try to understand them....

 

[PapaZoom]

Abortion proponent's claims are an interesting thing. When one examines those arguments closely, they are often contradictory claims. I believe this is why pro abortion proponents (those that are morally fine with abortion if that's what a woman chooses) must use many arguments to support their case. But for those that choose life, and in the case of this discussion we're talking about life for those unborn humans in the womb, there is but one main argument.

It's wrong to kill a human being without proper justification.
The unborn in a woman's womb are human beings
Abortion kills a human being.
Therefore abortion is unjust and immoral.

The bodily argument is an example of a contradictory argument that the pro abortion crowd uses. It fails right out the gate.

IF the argument is that every woman has the right to choose what she does with her own body, how is it that they also have the right to pay a doctor to dismember the body of another? They are not doing the procedure on their own body, but on the body of another. Isn't it an irony that the choice of abortion assures that approximately 650,000 females in the United States don’t have the right to choose what they do with their bodies."

 

[civilwarbuff]

Abortion proponent's claims are an interesting thing. When one examines those arguments closely, they are often contradictory claims. I believe this is why pro abortion proponents (those that are morally fine with abortion if that's what a woman chooses) must use many arguments to support their case. But for those that choose life, and in the case of this discussion we're talking about life for those unborn humans in the womb, there is but one main argument.

It's wrong to kill a human being without proper justification.
The unborn in a woman's womb are human beings
Abortion kills a human being.
Therefore abortion is unjust and immoral.

The bodily argument is an example of a contradictory argument that the pro abortion crowd uses. It fails right out the gate.

IF the argument is that every woman has the right to choose what she does with her own body, how is it that they also have the right to pay a doctor to dismember the body of another? They are not doing the procedure on their own body, but on the body of another. Isn't it an irony that the choice of abortion assures that approximately 650,000 females in the United States don’t have the right to choose what they do with their bodies."

Shhhh, you might hurt their feelings....

 

[civilwarbuff]

I don't since it doesn't apply to me.

Actually you can't because of 1 Cor 2:14; it is the one verse that specifically applies to unbelievers in their unbelief.

 

[SteveB28]

I sincerely remembered that detail at the moment I said I remembered it. If I had remembered it at the time I posted I would have immediately added it. But since it happened when I was five years old, it didn't immediately come to mind. But the solution is obvious. If it really bothers that much, just accuse me of deceit and ignore it. As simple as that. Ultimately, I neither gain nor lose from your trust since fortunately my judge is God.

No. Your judge is your own conscience.

 

[SteveB28]

Shhhh, you might hurt their feelings....

With that mangled logic? I doubt it!

 

[Radrook]

No. Your judge is your own conscience.

My conscience kicks in only when it perceives I have done something wrong.

 

[redleghunter]

The study seems to be implying that all of these women have one of the traits that describes a sociopath... Now I don't know what circles you run in maybe all of the people you know have those traits. But the people that run in mine all seem to regret doing dumb things, so this is why I'm having a big problem accepting the accuracy of the study...

Now if you had done the study it would lend more credence to it and explain why you believe it, but it appears that you didn't. So the stone I'm throwing is that I wonder how can you believe it???

How dare you inject common sense in this discussion!

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

This comes from #925:

Douglas Hendrickson said: ↑
You think we exist before we are made?
Douglas Hendrickson

I am sure God does not think the impossible, that we exist before we are made.

"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee..." can only mean God knew there was going to be a Jeremiah, knew of his characteristics, that there would be a great prophet, even before there was anything of him. (Except in the mind of God - God is omniscient, and this is an example of that - that God can know what will happen in the future well before it happens.)

God's knowledge does not mean some sort of pre-existence, except like I already said "in the mind of God."
That does not mean a car crosses a road before it crosses a road (or every Christmas comes every day!) and it certainly does not mean there is a human being even before there is anything in a womb. (Let alone during gestation.)

QUOTE="civilwarbuff, post: 69384040, member: 377216"]Come on now....do we really need to go back to the Hebrew lexicon or can you admit that "knew" means before? Why would you put limits on God knowing all? He is, was and will be....It seems as though you are trying to put him in a box and limit what he knows and when he knows it.[/QUOTE]

"Knew" is past tense, that is before. I certainly did not deny that. The knowing is actually foreknowledge. I certainly do not put any limits on God knowing all. Your post doesn't seem to make much sense, address what I actually said; you must be confusing knowing with being, with existing. There is a difference between knowing something, and something existing. Even God's knowing does not imply existence at any time other than the time it actually exists. I gave the extreme example of God's knowing all Christmasses and certainly that does not mean they all exist at one time. Nor does God knowing Jeremiah mean he existed when he did not exist, just like you didn't exist two hundred years ago yet I would not say God did not know you then. I don't know where you get I am putting limits on God's knowing - please give an example of my doing that.

(In case you don't think that we are made in the womb, check Job 31:15 "he that made me in the womb ...")

[I was unable to post this yesterday]