Abortion

Ransom

Beclowner of unseen treasures
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
8,263
Reaction score
202
Points
63
LongGone said:
The only way the Pro-Life movement wins is to win the minds of the women who are candidates for abortion.

The pro-life movement is currently winning because young women aged 18-29 are increasingly pro-life and feminist, who (rightly) see the abortion debate framed in terms of human rights.

I credit technology. That generation is the first for whom there has never been a time where the sonogram did not exist. Bernard Nathanson went from being a notorious abortionist to an ardent pro-lifer because once the sonogram allowed him to see inside the womb, he could no longer deny that he was  killing human beings. This young generation has grown up with ultrasound images of their younger siblings hung on the fridge. It's just another baby picture. If it's  a baby when it's proudly displayed on your fridge, how can you see it as anything else just because it's not "wanted"?
 

FSSL

Well-known member
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
7,104
Reaction score
104
Points
63
Pictures are huge!!!

The is why liberals do not want the pictures shown.

They didn't want the pictures shown of people dying during the 9-11 terrorist attack. Removing the horror makes things more palatable.

It wasn't until the German population SAW the horror of the Jewish extermination that they understood the horror of Hitler.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

LongGone

Active member
Registered
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
1,448
Reaction score
1
Points
38
Age
64
FSSL said:
Pictures are huge!!!

The is why liberals do not want the pictures shown.

They didn't want the pictures shown of people dying during the 9-11 terrorist attack. Removing the horror makes things more palatable.

It wasn't until the German population SAW the horror of the Jewish extermination that they understood the horror of Hitler.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Could you give me a list of liberals that don't want pictures showing of people dying during the 9-11 terrorist attack.
 

subllibrm

Active member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
5,975
Reaction score
6
Points
38
LongGone said:
FSSL said:
Pictures are huge!!!

The is why liberals do not want the pictures shown.

They didn't want the pictures shown of people dying during the 9-11 terrorist attack. Removing the horror makes things more palatable.

It wasn't until the German population SAW the horror of the Jewish extermination that they understood the horror of Hitler.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Could you give me a list of liberals that don't want pictures showing of people dying during the 9-11 terrorist attack.

Turning the focus to that does not make it any less true that the pro-abortionists do not want the American people to see those cute 3D ultrasound pictures of babies equated with an aborted "fetus".
 

Ransom

Beclowner of unseen treasures
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
8,263
Reaction score
202
Points
63
LongGone said:
Could you give me a list of liberals that don't want pictures showing of people dying during the 9-11 terrorist attack.

It's not a list, but the publication of photos of falling people generated a lot of complaints from newspaper readers (and an ethical debate in journalism circles) about, of all things, invasion of privacy.

Given that the New York Times was one of the first papers to publish "The Falling Man," it's not a stretch to assume that a significant proportion of the complainants were of a liberal bent.
 

prophet

Active member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
6,699
Reaction score
4
Points
38
Ransom said:
LongGone said:
Could you give me a list of liberals that don't want pictures showing of people dying during the 9-11 terrorist attack.

It's not a list, but the publication of photos of falling people generated a lot of complaints from newspaper readers (and an ethical debate in journalism circles) about, of all things, invasion of privacy.

Given that the New York Times was one of the first papers to publish "The Falling Man," it's not a stretch to assume that a significant proportion of the complainants were of a liberal bent.
I dont remember how many days it was, but I want to say after that first weekend, which was 5 days, the major networks had agreed to no longer show footage of anyone actually dying.



earnestly contend

 

Least of These

Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 18, 2013
Messages
146
Reaction score
7
Points
18
LongGone said:
Least of These said:
From Guttmacher.org, January 2015:

During the 2014 state legislative session, lawmakers introduced 335 provisions aimed at restricting access to abortion. By the end of the year, 15 states had enacted 26 new abortion restrictions. Including these new provisions, states have adopted 231 new abortion restrictions since the 2010 midterm elections swept abortion opponents into power in state capitals across the country.
----------------

Hard not to see a correlation between increased restrictions and fewer abortions. 

Link: https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2015/01/just-last-four-years-states-have-enacted-231-abortion-restrictions

If you go back and look at article by Gottmacher that Smellin copied it actually credits ACA with the reduction. Gottmacher also stated in release on January 17th that Improvements in contraceptive use are likely contributing o the decline but punitive abortion restrictions may also be a factor.

It was be reasonable to think that all had a impact.

It doesn't really "credit" the ACA - the guy admits it wasn't studied but "suggests" the decrease could be attributed to ACA.  Which, to me, means pretty much it's unsubstantiated spin.

Don't get me wrong - I'll take it if it means lower abortion numbers!  If women want to pay crazy-high insurance premiums so they get "free" birth control and it decreases the number of unwanted pregnancies, I'm not gonna complain.  But without data, I could just as easily "suggest" it's due to new regulations, or the PP videos, or Kermit Gosnell, or the attention given to infants "born alive".  Or, as you said,  most likely a combination of factors.

It's interesting that sonograms were mentioned above - just today a story came out on Twitter on that topic.

I support reducing unwanted pregnancies by affordable and over-the-counter birth control pills (including morning after).  I'd love for the government to transfer its PP funding to centers that provide all the same services EXCEPT abortion.  I support more restrictions & more oversight on abortion clinics.  Mostly I support using our voices to educate and persuade. 
 

LongGone

Active member
Registered
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
1,448
Reaction score
1
Points
38
Age
64
subllibrm said:
LongGone said:
FSSL said:
Pictures are huge!!!

The is why liberals do not want the pictures shown.

They didn't want the pictures shown of people dying during the 9-11 terrorist attack. Removing the horror makes things more palatable.

It wasn't until the German population SAW the horror of the Jewish extermination that they understood the horror of Hitler.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Could you give me a list of liberals that don't want pictures showing of people dying during the 9-11 terrorist attack.

Turning the focus to that does not make it any less true that the pro-abortionists do not want the American people to see those cute 3D ultrasound pictures of babies equated with an aborted "fetus".

I am not the one who brought up 9-11 as part of the argument. I don't want to change the focus I just asking for validation.
 

LongGone

Active member
Registered
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
1,448
Reaction score
1
Points
38
Age
64
Ransom said:
LongGone said:
Could you give me a list of liberals that don't want pictures showing of people dying during the 9-11 terrorist attack.

It's not a list, but the publication of photos of falling people generated a lot of complaints from newspaper readers (and an ethical debate in journalism circles) about, of all things, invasion of privacy.

Given that the New York Times was one of the first papers to publish "The Falling Man," it's not a stretch to assume that a significant proportion of the complainants were of a liberal bent.

So what you are saying is that you are really making a stretch to say that because everyone is not comfortable seeing people die and complained to the newspaper that somehow it was a liberal conspiracy. I get your point about the fetus pictures but I think your take 9-11 pictures is bizarre. I don't get how you think the two are related.
 

Ransom

Beclowner of unseen treasures
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
8,263
Reaction score
202
Points
63
LongGone said:
So what you are saying is that you are really making a stretch to say that because everyone is not comfortable seeing people die and complained to the newspaper that somehow it was a liberal conspiracy. I get your point about the fetus pictures but I think your take 9-11 pictures is bizarre. I don't get how you think the two are related.

That's fine, as it wasn't my argument. You were skeptical that there were people who didn't want to see images of people dying on 9/11; I pointed out that such people existed, and why. That's all.

Since you asked, my point about "fetus pictures" is that if we are going to have a debate about whether a woman ought to have a "right to choose," it is perfectly reasonable to show pictures of what is being chosen to allow people to see it for what it is. It's no different morally from showing people images of the Holocaust or Emmet Till in his casket, or putting images of diseased lungs on cigarette packaging and showing student drivers videos of fatal car crashes as a deterrent to smoking or drunk driving, respectively.
 

Tarheel Baptist

Well-known member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
7,868
Reaction score
60
Points
48
Ransom said:
LongGone said:
The only way the Pro-Life movement wins is to win the minds of the women who are candidates for abortion.

The pro-life movement is currently winning because young women aged 18-29 are increasingly pro-life and feminist, who (rightly) see the abortion debate framed in terms of human rights.

I credit technology. That generation is the first for whom there has never been a time where the sonogram did not exist. Bernard Nathanson went from being a notorious abortionist to an ardent pro-lifer because once the sonogram allowed him to see inside the womb, he could no longer deny that he was  killing human beings. This young generation has grown up with ultrasound images of their younger siblings hung on the fridge. It's just another baby picture. If it's  a baby when it's proudly displayed on your fridge, how can you see it as anything else just because it's not "wanted"?

I totally agree.

http://jimdaly.focusonthefamily.com/united-methodist-churchs-surprising-announcement/
 
Top