What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

This graph makes me nauseous (1 Viewer)

IvanKaramazov said:
PatsWillWin said:
I would hazard a guess that most people who are against abortion and classify it as murder would also believe that murder should be a capital crime.

Yet they probably wouldn't agree that the staggering number of women who have had an abortion should be rounded up and killed after proof of their murder was found. Why not?
I do have to grant you that this is an interesting consistency-check. My guess is that very few pro-life people really want to see getting-an-abortion prosecuted in the same way that they would want to see murder prosecuted. (For the record, I oppose the death penalty regardless, but I'm setting that aside because I get your point and don't want to derail things).

My personal views on this are twofold. First, I actually do have a lot of sympathy for some women who find themselves in this spot, and while I would like to prevent them from doing something that I view as evil and inhumane, criminal prosecution seems to be a step too far. Second, I will give quit a bit of ground if we can just agree to outlaw most abortions and leave it at that. So, for example, I will agree not to prosecute women who have abortions, and I will also agree to allow abortions for rape/incest/healthofmother if you agree to outlaw elective abortions and shut down clinics that provide them. Maybe that's not philosophically ideal -- different folks might feel differently about some of those items -- but it would be a big improvement over the status quo from the standpoint of a pro-life person.
That's a barbaric idea. So women would have to prove that they were raped in order to get an abortion?
If it were entirely up to me, I wouldn't allow a "rape exception." I'm offering this to the other side magnanimously in the spirit of compromise. If you'd rather just dispense with that exception, fine with me.
Yikes.
Rape exceptions are apparently barbaric. I was unaware of that until a few days ago. :shrug:
I think your explanation of it comes off as a little odd.

I find it pretty awful that abortion is used as birth control in many cases.. but I can't see where you draw the line for many other cases. On the whole I think women should be able to make these choices for themselves, the catch is the obvious fact that many people are incapable of making good choices.

"Outlawing" abortions and shutting down women's health clinics certainly wouldn't help anything. It would really only accomplish making the procedure less safe for the women that will of course still have it done. In addition, you would be denying women the greater good that these clinics provide (abortions represent a small piece of the services offered). The rape/incest/health of mother exception would only make sense if you extend the list by about 3-4 dozen other awful circumstances that encompass all the ways one would argue makes the procedure the right choice. Notice you did not list the health of the baby. Even then you are arbitrarily drawing a line that would hurt many other women and children.

 
This pie graph depicts the number of abortions performed since Roe v Wade in comparison to the US deaths in all of the major wars in US history.

The only wars you can even make out are the Civil War, WWI & WWII. The total section of all wars combined is maybe 3% of the total.

I don't care if you are pro-life or pro-choice, this is disgusting. I've never actually seen the numbers on abortions, but I would have never guessed it was so high. While abortions have been declining in recent years, there are still at around 750K - 1.2M abortions per year.

I'm honestly not looking to pick a fight, just think these numbers need to be seen by everyone to make an informed decision. The sheer volume is the equivalent of aborting the entire population of San Francisco or Austin each year.
Sorry if this joke was already made but, I'd be OK with aborting the population of SF or Austin.

 
This pie graph depicts the number of abortions performed since Roe v Wade in comparison to the US deaths in all of the major wars in US history.

The only wars you can even make out are the Civil War, WWI & WWII. The total section of all wars combined is maybe 3% of the total.

I don't care if you are pro-life or pro-choice, this is disgusting. I've never actually seen the numbers on abortions, but I would have never guessed it was so high. While abortions have been declining in recent years, there are still at around 750K - 1.2M abortions per year.

I'm honestly not looking to pick a fight, just think these numbers need to be seen by everyone to make an informed decision. The sheer volume is the equivalent of aborting the entire population of San Francisco or Austin each year.
Sorry if this joke was already made but, I'd be OK with aborting the population of SF or Austin.
bada bing, bada boom!

 
IvanKaramazov said:
PatsWillWin said:
I would hazard a guess that most people who are against abortion and classify it as murder would also believe that murder should be a capital crime.

Yet they probably wouldn't agree that the staggering number of women who have had an abortion should be rounded up and killed after proof of their murder was found. Why not?
I do have to grant you that this is an interesting consistency-check. My guess is that very few pro-life people really want to see getting-an-abortion prosecuted in the same way that they would want to see murder prosecuted. (For the record, I oppose the death penalty regardless, but I'm setting that aside because I get your point and don't want to derail things).

My personal views on this are twofold. First, I actually do have a lot of sympathy for some women who find themselves in this spot, and while I would like to prevent them from doing something that I view as evil and inhumane, criminal prosecution seems to be a step too far. Second, I will give quit a bit of ground if we can just agree to outlaw most abortions and leave it at that. So, for example, I will agree not to prosecute women who have abortions, and I will also agree to allow abortions for rape/incest/healthofmother if you agree to outlaw elective abortions and shut down clinics that provide them. Maybe that's not philosophically ideal -- different folks might feel differently about some of those items -- but it would be a big improvement over the status quo from the standpoint of a pro-life person.
That's a barbaric idea. So women would have to prove that they were raped in order to get an abortion?
If it were entirely up to me, I wouldn't allow a "rape exception." I'm offering this to the other side magnanimously in the spirit of compromise. If you'd rather just dispense with that exception, fine with me.
Yikes.
Rape exceptions are apparently barbaric. I was unaware of that until a few days ago. :shrug:
Well, I don't know what to say to that. A woman gets raped and a baby she had no choice in creating is conceived. Her government then effectively rapes her again by exerting control over her body and forcing her to carry and deliver the child of who raped her.

Barbaric is a perfect word for it.

 
By the way, if you are someone that believes that abortion is not in any way killing, I have no idea why it would matter how many abortions there are.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top