Dubstepforum.com

For the record... I'm pro-life. I believe LIFE begins at the moment of conception. "Pro Choice" begins with choosing not to have sex if you don't want children. Its not a woman's "right" to kill her unborn child. You can have the child and give it up for adoption. There are many couples who can't get pregnant who would love and care for that child. Please.

Serious debate only. Please, no personal attacks or trolling. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, this is just mine, and I'll respect your's with out getting personal.

It is her right, who the fuck are you to say it isn't?

sorry for what I said about your daughter, I'm sure she's lovely and that you've never wanked over her.

abortion should neither be encouraged nor denied.

I'm not sorry, I hope your daughter gets the clap.

this is obviously gonna turn into an argument

I agree that life begins at the moment of conception. I disagree with the notion of a 'right' to life.

[quote="butt jolokia"]"Pro Choice" begins with choosing not to have sex if you don't want children. quote]

What if you don't choose to have sex; underage, abuse, tsecni, rape etc?

Furthermore, if you're "entitled" to harboring your idiotic traditionalist neo-con views, then I'm also "entitled" to call you out on that bullshit.

one of my best friends got his 15y/o gf pregnant a few years ago because of a ripped condom.. imo abortion is ok in those occasions

For a long time, whenever i saw 'tsecni' on this forum, I thought it was some kind of deviant Japanese sexual practice.
What a tit!

why is the foetus' right to life more important the the woman's right/ability to kill? more importantly it isn't more powerful.

you can't legislate against it.

cityzen wrote:For a long time, whenever i saw 'tsecni' on this forum, I thought it was some kind of deviant Japanese sexual practice.
What a tit!

I spent 10mins Googling it before I clocked

Yo dawg we put a life in your life so you could live while you live.

Life begins at inception.

Fact of the matter is, the world works better when we can kill the people we don't want to have around.

Alright Butt Jolo..

A real issue I have with people claiming that zygotes (early stage fertilized eggs) are people is that they are

1. only a clump of cells more like a tumor, those cells don't even have assigned roles yet.

A fertilized egg just isn't a person. I like to talk about identical twins when people doubt this. They occur when a fertilized egg splits in two. Did one person just become two people? Which one was the original person? It just doesn't make sense to call that a human being.

Also, what always gets me is the disconnect between "life" and "human consciousness". What they're really talking about is the latter, and only the latter, since I don't see any of these people getting angry when someone squashes a bug or rallying to fight for the "right to life" of any other cells or organisms.

Frankly, it's self-centered. Let's face it, human beings have a tendency to obsessively think of themselves as the most important things ever, and this is an extension of that, taken to an extreme. Add a whole lot of ingrained misogyny and you get a really potent cocktail of logic fail.

Do people have the right to think this way and live accordingly for themselves? Sure. Do they have the right to force other people and their bodies to make the same decisions? No. There is just no ethical argument that justifies that. I know they believe they do, but it's fanaticism. Their arguments don't hold up, they have no proof, and even if "life" does begin at conception, it still exists in another life's body. A life that it is absolutely essential to be able to make reproductive choices for, that are not imposed by others they don't effect.

I often think there's a deeper, subconscious, existential dread going on with being non-personally anti-choice. Like the fear of death is just too much and they make abortion personal.

wub wrote:

cityzen wrote:For a long time, whenever i saw 'tsecni' on this forum, I thought it was some kind of deviant Japanese sexual practice.
What a tit!

I spent 10mins Googling it before I clocked

That makes me feel a lot better

if someone fucked (or even worse raped) your spouse and she became pregnant would you raise the child of your wife's rapist?

Mr Hyde wrote:
What if you don't choose to have sex; underage, abuse, tsecni, rape etc?

Underage sex = the grandparents being responsible for the support of the child and grandchild. After all, its is their responsibility to educate their children in the risk of unprotected sex... and that includes Sarah Palin's family.

Abuse= define please. But either way, the child should have the right to live. If the mother doesn't want the child, she has the option to give the child up for adoption.

inzest: The parties should be imprisoned and the child given to child protective services.

rape: the rapist should be imprisoned and the parent should make the choice to give the child up for adoption or raise the child.

Abortion is not the answer.

LACE wrote:
Do people have the right to think this way and live accordingly for themselves? Sure. Do they have the right to force other people and their bodies to make the same decisions? No.

This is what it comes down to for me. If Butt Jolokia's daughter gets impregnated through rape and he's committed enough to his retarded neo-con bullshit to forbid her from getting an abortion, that's on him.

However, saying that women in general shouldn't be allowed to do that is a whole another ballgame.

yeah of course..

depends on how you look at the term "to raise"