Posted on 05/20/2011 1:11:30 PM PDT by Sub-Driver
Insulting me doesn’t advance your argument. West is pro-choice. That’s a fact.
You mean absolute zero creation of life isn’t pro-life? Killing some of the babies who slip through that system isn’t pro-life either?
It’s never “OK” to “stop life”. That’s what being “pro-life” is all about. From conception to the end of our natural lives.
Speak.
stopping conception would also abort the life intended to be created through the act
to be technically accurate
It’s a concept that many do not understand.
:)
NOBODY has ever suggested that medical requirements to save a woman's life should be abolished (unless of course the requirement is a basic necessity like food and water, in which case the libertarians just want the woman murdered).
So, West believes that a child should be murdered because their father is a rapist or commits incest? For what other crimes does he believe the child should be executed for his or her father's deeds?
sounds like a rational stance on the issue.
Yep, abortionists are full of rationalizations.
it’s not pro-abortion and it leaves the choice with the mother.
So, he's "personally opposed" but thinks it should be the mother's "choice"?
Contraception is not pro-life.
so you believe the government should dictate the actions of the people?
absolutionists are always off the deep-end ... by definition
of course it is.
using a condom to stop the creation of life... which otherwise would have been created, still results in the stopping of that life.
a married woman on the pill her entire life has no children. without the pill, she could have had 3-6 easily.
the difference is in the mess level. the results are the same.
I think our government should enact and enforce laws against murder.
after re-reading, i just understood what you said.
so you agree... to be pro-life, you cannot use contraception
You should look up contraception in the dictionary before you go any further. I’ll give you a hint: it does not create life.
*************************************
You're making my point. Contraception interferes with the creation of life. It is therefore pro-choice/pro-abortion.
I believe that government has a duty to protect innocent life, it is the reason for government.
absolutionists are always off the deep-end ... by definition
I assume you meant "absolutists" because I don't intend to absolve baby killers of anything.
But yes, I believe the right to life is absolute. It is what our Republic was founded on.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,
Now, I understand that libertarians essentially despise the notion of government altogether, but their insistence that the Founding Fathers felt the same way is completely unfounded.
if you intentionally stop a life from being created... which would have been created otherwise...
you have aborted that life from coming into existence.
as assuredly as if it was 6 months from being born.
the difference being the level of intervention required
You’re learning. Now look up conception. I’ll give you another hint: it doesn’t mean contraception.
i believe you are agreeing with me on what i would call strict, or absolute, pro-life
i’m not on board with that. i do not believe good fruit can come from seeds planted by evil acts. that said, i still believe the choice is up to the individual... and should be agonized over.
the difference between the two positions isn’t nearly as great with the pro-abortion crowd.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.