BF2S Forums Virgina about to pass law that may force vaginal probe for abortion

Ty, he was referring to Partial Birth Abortion when he said stabbing baby in head and sucking its brains out.

Ty wrote:

Then he should have said so.

Actually he did earlier.

HITNRUNXX wrote:

Shahter wrote:

point me at where i was trying to "make abortion into a selfless act".

Ok:

Shahter wrote:

i only think he should have been killed by his own parents when they had the opportunity and didn't know if he would have to spend his life drooling on the floor and in constant pain

Sounds like you are claiming selfless mercy killing to me.

selfless? mercy killing? man, you are confusing me with the likes of yourself, who feel like it's okay to project ones personal "beliefs" into other people's affairs.

Shahter wrote:

all you could come up with, aside from your "beliefs",

My beliefs are all I am. Your beliefs are all you are. Since that is what makes us who we are, I don't think that should be discounted just because you disagree.

speak for yourself, would you kindly. what i express here is opinions - those things, you know, that are based on knowledge and life experience. they can also be changed if new info becomes available. i really think you should ditch some of those retarded beliefs you have and try to form some opinions for yourself - just to see how it works. you'd be amazed how wonderful the world is when it's not set in stone and painted in black and white.

Shahter wrote:

is a "thank god"-schtick and one example of how it supposedly worked out

Yes, I am sure he is the ONLY example in the whole world of it working out. I am positive it doesn't even happen to anyone else. I am certain no one with disabilities that could have been detected pre-birth have made any contributions to the world.

ah, so some of those impaired people have fared better that others? yeah, sure, but how many more of such people have spend their life in agony? you understand that the ratio is fucking overwhelming, don't you? and you still would have all of them be born into this world into a lifetime of misery just so maybe a few of them survive and do better than the rest? some beliefs you have in there, man.

Shahter wrote:

(even though, i'm pretty sure you don't even know if the cause for cerebral palsy your friend has happened in utero or during/after birth).

gg.

Actually I do. His mother was involved in an accident when about 6 months pregnant. The doctors, while trying to operate on her made a mistake and basically stabbed him in the brain. They said they were pretty certain he would never make it, and if he did he would never be a functional human being.

but they still gambled with that possibility - certainty even - and i'm the one advocating "barbarous practices" here?

Shahter wrote:

selfless? mercy killing? man, you are confusing me with the likes of yourself, who feel like it's okay to project ones personal "beliefs" into other people's affairs.

Shahter wrote:

ah, so some of those impaired people have fared better that others? yeah, sure, but how many more of such people have spend their life in agony? you understand that the ratio is fucking overwhelming, don't you? and you still would have all of them be born into this world into a lifetime of misery just so maybe a few of them survive and do better than the rest? some beliefs you have in there, man.

Shahter wrote:

but they still gambled with that possibility - certainty even - and i'm the one advocating "barbarous practices" here?

You are doing it again... Claiming you are not saying something, and then turning around and saying it anyway. You believe he should have been killed as a selfless act, for his sake, to avoid his suffering. Well guess what, buddy? There is a lot of suffering in life. Should we kill every kid as soon as they are diagnosed with terminal cancer? Afterall, it is only going to get worse from there, and we might as well put them out off their misery. That is how you are coming across. That allowing someone to live with a disease (you are the one that brought up cerebral palsy, I remind you) is a fate worse than death. I disagree. I believe in giving someone chances. Oh I know, that even believe word again.

Shahter wrote:

all you could come up with, aside from your "beliefs",
speak for yourself, would you kindly. what i express here is opinions - those things, you know, that are based on knowledge and life experience. they can also be changed if new info becomes available. i really think you should ditch some of those retarded beliefs you have and try to form some opinions for yourself - just to see how it works. you'd be amazed how wonderful the world is when it's not set in stone and painted in black and white.

What do you think "beliefs" are, genius? So you claim you are not made up of beliefs, but only opinions. Well let's look up the word opinion:

Merriam-Webster wrote:

2.a.: belief stronger than impression and less strong than positive knowledge

So OH MY GOD your opinions are your beliefs. Shocking. And obvious. But you would rather play ignorant semantic wordsmithing games and attack people than share your own BELIEFS. Which you avoid continuously. You love to tell people they are wrong, but instead, try spelling out what you believe it right. Where do YOU draw the line between life and not-life, for example. I have shared my opinions (another word for beliefs) on the matter. I spelled everything out. And you like to sit back and attack everything that is said. Ty disagrees with me, but at least I see his BELIEFS out there and I respect him for sharing them. You are just being an ass.

Thats well and truely fucked up.

HITNRUNXX wrote:

<here be lotsa stating of beliefs and arguing semantics>

that's not how discussion works, my believer friend. words, like "beliefs", "opinions" and what not, can have many meanings, but we are not discussing those here, but the topic of this thread. it is the context of the discussion that defines the nature of stuff named by the words used, not what you choose to pull out of your ass or merriam-webster. so let me make it quite plain for you:

in this thread you've been presented with many arguments, like the one showing you that, though technically alive, even the perfectly healthy human child might, under certain circumstances, never grow to be an actual human being, then you've been asked how exactly do you justify bringing all those freaks, like downs, into this world when a way exist to simply start over, and you replied with what exactly? simply that your "belief" is so-and-so? and that everybody else's opinions, which were backed up by solid points that you never even addressed, are just like your "beliefs" too because mariam-webster says so? you call that "discussion"?

whatever.

Last edited by Shahter (2012-08-24 02:50:26)

Jaekus wrote:

I would be far more concerned about this than a woman's right to abort:

Shauna R. Prewitt, a lawyer in Chicago, has an absolutely terrible and horrifying story to tell. When she was twenty-one years of age, she was raped. Contrary to the belief of some conservatives, this rape conceived a child. Shauna Prewitt, like a surprising thirty percent of women who conceive by rape, decided to keep the child.

And she was sued for custody by the rapist. In an article published today by CNN, she talks about the despicable lack of justice that led to this, “It would not be long before I would learn firsthand that in the most of states — 31 — men who father through rape are able to assert the same custody and visitation rights to their children that other fathers enjoy. When no law prohibits a rapist from exercising these rights, a woman may feel forced to bargain away her legal rights to a criminal trial in exchange for the rapist dropping the bid to have access to her child.”

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/08/22 … fic-story/

Sounds to me that using rape an argument for abortion is pointless, she actually is fighting for her child. I thought the child reminds her of the rapists and is emotionally effecting her? Isn't she seeing the rapist's face through her baby, why keep such a thing?

War Man wrote:

Sounds to me that using rape an argument for abortion is pointless, she actually is fighting for her child. I thought the child reminds her of the rapists and is emotionally effecting her? Isn't she seeing the rapist's face through her baby, why keep such a thing?

The child would also remind her of herself, the strength of having to endure the rape, emotional and phsical. She can see her own face in the child and be proud of the son/daughter she raised despite who the father is.

And most rapes are not by random strangers, but people the woman knows. What difference would a child make to remind you of that?

yes, he can. wait for it . . .

It was a response to certain people here(see link as an example).
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pi … 3#p3828863

Edit: Now shut the fuck up

Last edited by War Man (2012-08-24 19:03:47)

The cool kids like abortion and couldn't give a flying turd about a fetus, got it.

13urnzz wrote:

War Man wrote:

Edit: Now shut the fuck up

no. you shut the fuck up. you do not have the logistics to shut down intelligent people, or the means to advance your inbred, narrow-minded talking point. The majority of this forum and indeed the world does not agree with your home schooled, bucolic outlook on reality. begone to your parents' 18th century world view and comment on the 21st century no more.

Lol