Political Forums
Forum Notice

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Abortion

Abortion Abortion Forum - A complex ethical, moral, philosophical, biological, and legal issue


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old June 23rd, 2011, 01:22 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
gulfwar_veteran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,501
Georgia Considers Outlawing Abortions Based on Race, Gender



By Stephen Clark - FOXNews.com







Georgia lawmakers are poised to take up acontroversial bill that would outlaw abortions prompted by the baby's race orgender, an issue that has inspired a billboard campaign claiming a racialconspiracy is behind the termination of pregnancies.



Arehealth care providers using abortion to curb the growth of the U.S. blackpopulation?



http://www.foxnews.c...ed-race-gender/



The group pushing this campaign has createdtheir own website to further their politically correct and unsubstantiatedfallacious assertions here:



http://www.toomanyaborted.com/



What the FoxNews article and the group’swebsite fail to address is the fact that Black teens have the highest teenpregnancy rate. For young women age 15-19, black teens are most likely tobecome pregnant (134 per 1,000 women). Slightly lower rates occur amongHispanics (131 per 1,000) followed by non-Hispanic whites (48 per 1,000).



http://womensissues....eenpregancy.htm



Georgia is number 8 on the top 10 list ofstates with the highest rate of teenage pregnancies.



http://womensissues....nPregStates.htm



“Davis noted that in 2008, blacks made up 30percent of the population in Georgia but more than 57 percent of the abortions.”



That’s because, as stated above, blacks havethe highest teen pregnancy rates; ergo abortion rates among black women will behigher than other races.



“Davis said one study shows there is a directcorrelation between the location of most abortion clinics in urban areas andthe number of abortions by black women. In Georgia, she said, 100 percent ofthe clinics are in urban areas. Nationwide, it's 75 percent, she said.”



Again, because the teen pregnancy rates areso high among minorities that those abortion clinics are nearest to urbanareas; it’s basic supply and demand, and that is a fact and it cannot bedisputed.



From toomanyaborted.com: “Today, abortionkills more African-Americans, per year, than heart disease, cancer, respiratorydisease, accidents, homicides, suicide, and cancer–combined.3 Abortions in theblack community occur at 3x the rate of those among the white population and 2xthat of all other races combined.4 The truth screams loud and clear–we arekilling our very future.”



The real truth is that there are more than143 MILLION unwanted/orphaned children worldwide! Let me say that again…thereare more than 143 MILLION unwanted/orphaned children worldwide!



That being said, we do not need to add to thegrowing population problem that this planet faces by adding more people that neitherthe earth nor our social-economic means can support.



Moreover, these pregnancies are just that,pregnancies…not “babies” or “African-Americans” (hyphenated names being utterlydivisive, but I digress as that is another argument). That which is conceivedbetween human beings is merely human in origin, but that does not equate thatconception equal to an actual “human being.” The conception has the potentialto become an actual human being, but that which is potential cannot be an actualsimultaneously. It is physically, biologically, and physiologically impossibleand that is a fact that cannot be argued otherwise. No matter how much you wantto believe otherwise, based either on religion or just personal conviction;scientific fact trumps your unsubstantiated opinion.



The only real fact or truth printed on theirsite is the following statement



Men need to step upand own up to their responsibility as fathers.”



It’s easy for a man to convince and get agirl or woman pregnant and walk away, since it is the woman who has to carrythat which he participated in creating. However, as the law would have it, theman has little to no rights in any decision that the woman would have. How’sthat for hypocrisy in this entire debate/issue. Again I digress, as that isanother debate.



gulfwar_veteran is offline  
Remove Ads
Old June 23rd, 2011, 01:53 PM   #2
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,575
Quote:
How’sthat for hypocrisy in this entire debate/issue. Again I digress, as that isanother debate.


I don't believe that it is hypocritical at all. If a man gets to decide that he wants a child and the woman does not, it is the woman who has to incubate a child even if she doesn't want to, if the laws favored a man having a stake in the decision. And that is wrong.
waitingtables is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 02:17 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
gulfwar_veteran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,501
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
Quote:
How’sthat for hypocrisy in this entire debate/issue. Again I digress, as that isanother debate.


I don't believe that it is hypocritical at all. If a man gets to decide that he wants a child and the woman does not, it is the woman who has to incubate a child even if she doesn't want to, if the laws favored a man having a stake in the decision. And that is wrong.



As legal history has shown, the man has never had the upper hand in court decisions in either custody cases or cases where the child has not even been born yet (i.e. a man, nor a court, cannot force a woman to give birth that which was conceived she does not want).



So with all due respect, your point is moot.



TS
gulfwar_veteran is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 03:42 PM   #4
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWV View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables' timestamp='1308866000' post='338926

Quote:
How’sthat for hypocrisy in this entire debate/issue. Again I digress, as that isanother debate.


I don't believe that it is hypocritical at all. If a man gets to decide that he wants a child and the woman does not, it is the woman who has to incubate a child even if she doesn't want to, if the laws favored a man having a stake in the decision. And that is wrong.



As legal history has shown, the man has never had the upper hand in court decisions in either custody cases or cases where the child has not even been born yet (i.e. a man, nor a court, cannot force a woman to give birth that which was conceived she does not want).



So with all due respect, your point is moot.



TS


I see we've got ourselves another anti-woman character on board. I think you have misunderstood my point, a point that is not moot as it directly refers to your comment, the one that I quoted.



As legal history has shown it is only in recent history that a woman had any legal rights or personhood at all. Now, we have finally come to the point where the Consitution is applied to women as well, and Constitutionally, we women have a right to decide what happens in our own bodies.



A fetus being created by a man and a woman through intercourse does not transfer ownership of that woman's body to the man who got her pregnant. That is something that any simple minded person could understand. It isn't rocket science. And it isn't up for a debate whether or not a woman's body can be taken over because she is pregnant. The United States Supreme Court decided that 40 years ago. If a woman doesn't want to have a child, she may terminate her pregnancy within the timeframe established by the individual state the woman is seeking an abortion in.



There is no test to determine fatherhood in those stages of pregnancy, so of course some man claiming that she is pregnant with his child is making unprovable claims and that doesn't nullify a woman's Consitutional protections or her rights to bodily sovereignty.



Let me guess, you are divorced and paying child support and feel like you got screwed because you are a man. That has nothing to do with a man being able to force a woman to incubate a child that she doesn't want.
waitingtables is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 04:17 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
gulfwar_veteran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,501
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWV' timestamp='1308867475' post='338928

[quote name='waitingtables' timestamp='1308866000' post='338926']

Quote:
How’sthat for hypocrisy in this entire debate/issue. Again I digress, as that isanother debate.


I don't believe that it is hypocritical at all. If a man gets to decide that he wants a child and the woman does not, it is the woman who has to incubate a child even if she doesn't want to, if the laws favored a man having a stake in the decision. And that is wrong.



As legal history has shown, the man has never had the upper hand in court decisions in either custody cases or cases where the child has not even been born yet (i.e. a man, nor a court, cannot force a woman to give birth that which was conceived she does not want).



So with all due respect, your point is moot.



TS


I see we've got ourselves another anti-woman character on board. I think you have misunderstood my point, a point that is not moot as it directly refers to your comment, the one that I quoted.



As legal history has shown it is only in recent history that a woman had any legal rights or personhood at all. Now, we have finally come to the point where the Consitution is applied to women as well, and Constitutionally, we women have a right to decide what happens in our own bodies.



A fetus being created by a man and a woman through intercourse does not transfer ownership of that woman's body to the man who got her pregnant. That is something that any simple minded person could understand. It isn't rocket science. And it isn't up for a debate whether or not a woman's body can be taken over because she is pregnant. The United States Supreme Court decided that 40 years ago. If a woman doesn't want to have a child, she may terminate her pregnancy within the timeframe established by the individual state the woman is seeking an abortion in.



There is no test to determine fatherhood in those stages of pregnancy, so of course some man claiming that she is pregnant with his child is making unprovable claims and that doesn't nullify a woman's Consitutional protections or her rights to bodily sovereignty.



Let me guess, you are divorced and paying child support and feel like you got screwed because you are a man. That has nothing to do with a man being able to force a woman to incubate a child that she doesn't want.

[/quote]





I am no anti-woman character and you are a BAD JUDGEMENT of character. I am a happily married man of 14 years; and have an education both personally (worldly and locally) and academically that exceeds your own. If I am wrong, the please tell me you have a degrees higher than a Paralegal and Criminology degree, plus 5 years military police experience on more than one continent.



So....feel free to try again with your asinine substantiated suppositions.



TS







gulfwar_veteran is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 04:47 PM   #6
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,575
LOL





WT
waitingtables is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 06:15 PM   #7
Not Believing My Eyes....
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 29,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWV View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables' timestamp='1308872551' post='338939

[quote name='GWV' timestamp='1308867475' post='338928']

[quote name='waitingtables' timestamp='1308866000' post='338926']

Quote:
How’sthat for hypocrisy in this entire debate/issue. Again I digress, as that isanother debate.


I don't believe that it is hypocritical at all. If a man gets to decide that he wants a child and the woman does not, it is the woman who has to incubate a child even if she doesn't want to, if the laws favored a man having a stake in the decision. And that is wrong.



As legal history has shown, the man has never had the upper hand in court decisions in either custody cases or cases where the child has not even been born yet (i.e. a man, nor a court, cannot force a woman to give birth that which was conceived she does not want).



So with all due respect, your point is moot.



TS


I see we've got ourselves another anti-woman character on board. I think you have misunderstood my point, a point that is not moot as it directly refers to your comment, the one that I quoted.



As legal history has shown it is only in recent history that a woman had any legal rights or personhood at all. Now, we have finally come to the point where the Consitution is applied to women as well, and Constitutionally, we women have a right to decide what happens in our own bodies.



A fetus being created by a man and a woman through intercourse does not transfer ownership of that woman's body to the man who got her pregnant. That is something that any simple minded person could understand. It isn't rocket science. And it isn't up for a debate whether or not a woman's body can be taken over because she is pregnant. The United States Supreme Court decided that 40 years ago. If a woman doesn't want to have a child, she may terminate her pregnancy within the timeframe established by the individual state the woman is seeking an abortion in.



There is no test to determine fatherhood in those stages of pregnancy, so of course some man claiming that she is pregnant with his child is making unprovable claims and that doesn't nullify a woman's Consitutional protections or her rights to bodily sovereignty.



Let me guess, you are divorced and paying child support and feel like you got screwed because you are a man. That has nothing to do with a man being able to force a woman to incubate a child that she doesn't want.

[/quote]





I am no anti-woman character and you are a BAD JUDGEMENT of character. I am a happily married man of 14 years; and have an education both personally (worldly and locally) and academically that exceeds your own. If I am wrong, the please tell me you have a degrees higher than a Paralegal and Criminology degree, plus 5 years military police experience on more than one continent.



So....feel free to try again with your asinine substantiated suppositions.



TS

[/quote]



Well, you've met WT now. Don't tread on the holy grail of feminism, suggest that men might face gender inequalities, note that young boys today are being feminized, or for God's sake don't ignore the Goddess. If you do, brace yourself for WT noting that we've got ourselves another anti-woman character on board.



WT talks about the "good men" out there. Here's the translation: "Good men" agree with her 100 percent, or nearly so. In WT's "Men Rating System," only two grades are given: An "A" or an "F." Women's rights are a black and white issue. Every shade of grey is, unfortunately, black.



If you haven't figured it out, but I'm sure you have, I am another one of WT's anti-woman characters.
imaginethat is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 07:55 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
gulfwar_veteran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,501
Thanks for the heads up "imaginethat" regarding WT.



TS
gulfwar_veteran is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 07:56 PM   #9
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,575
Leave it to you to side with the men that have fucked up woman issues, and had bad divorces and more than one or two marriages. Anti-woman is someone who actually thinks that forced motherhood is acceptable. Hey IT, take your gender issues and shove them, eh? There is nothing wrong with fighting to keep women from losing rights that were denied to us for centuries. If that's what you think of someone that places importance on the individual liberties of all citizens, you are not being honest here about who you are. The Holy Grail my ass, stop mischaracterizing me, when you do, you just expose your bitterness and prove my point.
waitingtables is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 07:59 PM   #10
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,575
Male Gender Inequality? Seriously?





Whew! That's rich. With the exception of some custody and child support issues, what pray tell, might those be?
waitingtables is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 08:02 PM   #11
Nomad
 
fxashun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Ga
Posts: 23,113
There are several states that already have laws that are supposed to ban racial and gender based abortion, problem is, when you can have an abortion "cause I want to", they are impossible to enforce. It's not like a chick is gonna go in there and proclaim loudly she's having an abortion because she's having a girl(gender most often aborted) or because she screwed someone outside of her race and she thinks he got her pregnant.
fxashun is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 08:03 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
gulfwar_veteran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,501
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
Leave it to you to side with the men that have fucked up woman issues and had bad divorces and more than one or two marriages...


It is really bad form and a clear sign of weakness in your position when you personally attack someone you DO NOT know personally. We are not fishing buddies, we haven't even had casual coffee together. So any claim you have about me or who or what I am personally or ideologically is completely asinine unsubstantiated ignorant subjective opinion.



Quote:
Anti-woman is someone who actually thinks that forced motherhood is acceptable. Hey IT, take your gender issues and shove them, eh? There is nothing wrong with fighting to keep women from losing rights that were denied to us for centuries. If that's what you think of someone that places importance on the individual liberties of all citizens, you are not being honest here about who you are. The Holy Grail my ass, stop mischaracterizing me, when you do, you just expose your bitterness and prove my point.




When I was taking my criminology courses, I purposes took gender study courses that supported women's rights. I even did a course in a all female prison alongside other women in prison who earned the same course credit as I learning about the same things together.



Additionally, I even bought the book my gender studies teacher wrote about abortions not being a full and complete right of women as a woman's right and took it to get her autograph.



That, WT, is how BAD a judge of character you are.



Make ASSumptions first, asking questions later; right?



TS
gulfwar_veteran is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 08:06 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
Male Gender Inequality? Seriously?





Whew! That's rich. With the exception of some custody and child support issues, what pray tell, might those be?
In another thread it's clear that GWV is a homophobe and a racist too. With the misogyny here he's achieved the trifecta of blogging.
skrekk is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 08:08 PM   #14
Not Believing My Eyes....
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 29,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
Leave it to you to side with the men that have fucked up woman issues, and had bad divorces and more than one or two marriages. Anti-woman is someone who actually thinks that forced motherhood is acceptable. Hey IT, take your gender issues and shove them, eh? There is nothing wrong with fighting to keep women from losing rights that were denied to us for centuries. If that's what you think of someone that places importance on the individual liberties of all citizens, you are not being honest here about who you are. The Holy Grail my ass, stop mischaracterizing me, when you do, you just expose your bitterness and prove my point.


You never disappoint... WT.



You'll wake up one day, hopefully, and realize you have more allies than you realized. For now, when you slice into masculinity with your ever-sharp blade, expect a slice in return. Count on it.
imaginethat is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 08:09 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
gulfwar_veteran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,501
Quote:
Originally Posted by skrekk View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables' timestamp='1308887977' post='339001

Male Gender Inequality? Seriously?





Whew! That's rich. With the exception of some custody and child support issues, what pray tell, might those be?
In another thread it's clear that GWV is a homophobe and a racist too. With the misogyny here he's achieved the trifecta of blogging.




Nice subjective asinine unsubstantiated ad hominem argument; and I was accused of breaking the rules of the forum within like 3 postings...
gulfwar_veteran is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 08:10 PM   #16
Not Believing My Eyes....
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 29,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
Male Gender Inequality? Seriously?





Whew! That's rich. With the exception of some custody and child support issues, what pray tell, might those be?


Why would I waste my time doing that? The gender issues of both sexes are evident to anyone who wants to see. You don't want to see.
imaginethat is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 08:10 PM   #17
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWV View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables' timestamp='1308887809' post='339000

Leave it to you to side with the men that have fucked up woman issues and had bad divorces and more than one or two marriages...


It is really bad form and a clear sign of weakness in your position when you personally attack someone you DO NOT know personally. We are not fishing buddies, we haven't even had casual coffee together. So any claim you have about me or who or what I am personally or ideologically is completely asinine unsubstantiated ignorant subjective opinion.



Quote:
Anti-woman is someone who actually thinks that forced motherhood is acceptable. Hey IT, take your gender issues and shove them, eh? There is nothing wrong with fighting to keep women from losing rights that were denied to us for centuries. If that's what you think of someone that places importance on the individual liberties of all citizens, you are not being honest here about who you are. The Holy Grail my ass, stop mischaracterizing me, when you do, you just expose your bitterness and prove my point.




When I was taking my criminology courses, I purposes took gender study courses that supported women's rights. I even did a course in a all female prison alongside other women in prison who earned the same course credit as I learning about the same things together.



Additionally, I even bought the book my gender studies teacher wrote about abortions not being a full and complete right of women as a woman's right and took it to get her autograph.



That, WT, is how BAD a judge of character you are.



Make ASSumptions first, asking questions later; right?



TS


I wan't talking to you, genius.



You don't know squat about abortion or women's issues and what you think you know, is obviously some far out crap that you conjured up out of some issues you have or had or some dumb asses that you've been hanging around with or were raised by.
waitingtables is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 08:11 PM   #18
Not Believing My Eyes....
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 29,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWV View Post
Thanks for the heads up "imaginethat" regarding WT.



TS


You're welcome.
imaginethat is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 08:12 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
gulfwar_veteran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,501
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
You don't know squat about abortion or women's issues and what you think you know, is obviously some far out crap that you conjured up out of some issues you have or had or some dumb asses that you've been hanging around with or were raised by.


Dare I repeat myself...



It is really bad form and a clear sign of weakness in your position when you personally attack someone you DO NOT know personally. We are not fishing buddies, we haven't even had casual coffee together. So any claim you have about me or who or what I am personally or ideologically is completely asinine unsubstantiated ignorant subjective opinion.





Moreover, you have not even the slight inclination what I have learned either personally, vicariously, or academically when it comes to the matters of abortion. Therefore, to make any claims that you do is as equally asinine as your personal attacks upon my character and/or messages that you clearly could not successfully retort out of a wet paper bag.



TS



gulfwar_veteran is offline  
Old June 23rd, 2011, 08:14 PM   #20
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables' timestamp='1308887809' post='339000

Leave it to you to side with the men that have fucked up woman issues, and had bad divorces and more than one or two marriages. Anti-woman is someone who actually thinks that forced motherhood is acceptable. Hey IT, take your gender issues and shove them, eh? There is nothing wrong with fighting to keep women from losing rights that were denied to us for centuries. If that's what you think of someone that places importance on the individual liberties of all citizens, you are not being honest here about who you are. The Holy Grail my ass, stop mischaracterizing me, when you do, you just expose your bitterness and prove my point.


You never disappoint... WT.



You'll wake up one day, hopefully, and realize you have more allies than you realized. For now, when you slice into masculinity with your ever-sharp blade, expect a slice in return. Count on it.


Your problem is you feel the need to jump to the defense of men when I slice into the ones that are clearly effing wrong. Do you disagree with the points I made about abortion and fathers not having a say in whether or not a woman has one? If you don't, you're wrong, and you simply refuse to see it. If you do, then what the hell are you siding with the troll for? You can clearly recognize the style here can't you? You weren't born yesterday.
waitingtables is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Abortion

Tags
abortions, billboard, blacks, claiming, controversial, kill


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
After Birth Abortions hot dragon Abortion 144 May 5th, 2013 01:32 PM
Lesbians arrested for claiming fake hate crime Wayne Malley Current Events 19 May 21st, 2012 06:38 AM
Tom Udall / Mark Udall Cabal Killed Dadt, Now Scheme To Kill Filibuster To Kill Doma The Revelator Politicians 0 January 5th, 2011 06:19 PM
An Atheist Billboard tadpole256 Atheism 64 August 6th, 2008 04:37 AM
Mercy abortions... OKgrannie Abortion 17 July 15th, 2008 05:45 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.