|
Grex > Agora56 > #125: Kludge Report Part C -- Die, You Little Black Babies | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 331 responses total. |
marcvh
|
|
response 11 of 331:
| 
Feb 24 17:09 UTC 2006 |
I have never heard someone use the term "pro-abortion" with reference
to themselves in a serious context; it's a label which is pretty much
exclusively used by people who oppose it, which should provide a hint
as to its accuracy.
By contrast, "pro-gun" is a term which many people do use to refer to
themselves rather than to other people, which leads me to believe that
they consider it an appropriate phrasing. This makes sense if you think
about it; lots of NRA members will freely brag about how many guns they
own and how many more they would like to own, while very few Planned
Parenthood members will freely brag about how many abortions they've had
and how any more they would like to have in the future.
|
tod
|
|
response 12 of 331:
|
Feb 24 17:10 UTC 2006 |
Ceaucescu was pro-life
|
klg
|
|
response 13 of 331:
|
Feb 24 17:10 UTC 2006 |
RW - Red China is a repressive totalitarian regime. The Netherlands
isn't . . . . . quite yet.
Johnny/johnnie
Try not to use words you don't understand.
eu gen ics [ yoo j nniks ] noun
Definitions: selective breeding as proposed human improvement: the
proposed improvement of the human species by encouraging or permitting
reproduction of only those people with genetic characteristics judged
desirable.
The proposal deals with reducing the number of poor, unwanted, unhappy
children, not with breeding by genetic characteristics.
Now, does anyone actually have anything substantive to say?
|
edina
|
|
response 14 of 331:
|
Feb 24 17:49 UTC 2006 |
Well then what would you call it?
|
johnnie
|
|
response 15 of 331:
|
Feb 24 18:11 UTC 2006 |
Blondie wants to use forced contraception and abortion ("selective
breeding") to cut down on the number of children born to black folk,
drug addicts, and the mentally handicapped ("genetic characteristics")
to make the Netherlands a better place ("proposed improvement"). Fits
the definition well enough for me, Ran--er, "klg".
|
keesan
|
|
response 16 of 331:
|
Feb 24 18:21 UTC 2006 |
Babies born to drug users (this includes caffeine and nicotine and alcohol)
have lower birth weight and more genetic defects.
|
happyboy
|
|
response 17 of 331:
|
Feb 24 18:50 UTC 2006 |
no shit?
|
tod
|
|
response 18 of 331:
|
Feb 24 18:52 UTC 2006 |
My brother was a HUGE PUMPKIN and mom drank and smoked like Jerry Lee Lewis
locked in a bowling alley.
|
jep
|
|
response 19 of 331:
|
Feb 24 20:08 UTC 2006 |
re resp:10: I am anti-abortion. I am anti-choice on abortion. I am
pro-life in that I favor the life of the fetus over the choice of it's
mother. I oppose the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision.
My order of preference on the social issue of abortion is:
1. Constitutional Amendment illegalizing abortion
2. National law illegalizing abortion
3. Overthrow of Roe v Wade, returning the issue to the states to decide
4. Restrictions on techniques, drugs, doctors, hospitals, etc.
Say it how you want to say it, my opinion is that abortion is bad and
that it is murder of an innocent child. The label you use doesn't
matter to me.
|
tod
|
|
response 20 of 331:
|
Feb 24 20:21 UTC 2006 |
I have sort of the same opinion except my opinion is that guys shouldn't be
allowed to vote on a woman's body nor should they be allowed to support a war
if they're not a veteran nor have the capacity/intention to enlist.
I am in favor of the life of our military and women over that of pussies.
Unless a guy is willing to submit to shitting a 12 lb bowling ball, then he
should keep his laws off women.
|
jadecat
|
|
response 21 of 331:
|
Feb 24 20:24 UTC 2006 |
resp: 19 Because women just don't matter.
If abortion is illegal than EVERY single man who impregnates a woman had
better be legally liable for part of her health care and the needs for
that child. Lawmakers had better get off their asses and make sure that
there are actually some responsible men out there who are also forced to
take care of a responsiblity they don't want.
|
tod
|
|
response 22 of 331:
|
Feb 24 20:27 UTC 2006 |
re #21
I agree. Any guy who gets a fat chick pregnant should have to marry her if
they overturn Roe v. Wade. Then, we can turn our clocks back to the 1950's
and watch Ricky beat Lucy's ass for burning his toast.
*rolls eyes*
Banning abortion is the dumbest idea ever.
|
jadecat
|
|
response 23 of 331:
|
Feb 24 20:32 UTC 2006 |
Heh, well maybe not marry- but definitely be in as deep financially as
she is. And provide medical care for the kid, AND be there like she has
to be, and so on. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
|
keesan
|
|
response 24 of 331:
|
Feb 24 20:32 UTC 2006 |
How about passing a national health care bill that at least takes care of the
health of all the unwanted babies that would be born if abortion were made
illegal (also the health of anyone getting an illegal abortion that they
survive). Why are the conservatives so often in favor of making more unwanted
babies but not taking care of them once they are born? Would conservatives
oppose free prenatal and postnatal health care for all mothers?
|
kingjon
|
|
response 25 of 331:
|
Feb 24 20:35 UTC 2006 |
Conservatives aren't in favor of *making* unwanted babies, just not in favor of
*killing* them. I'm against abortion for the same reason as I'm against
infanticide, because in my mind it's the same thing.
|
tod
|
|
response 26 of 331:
|
Feb 24 20:35 UTC 2006 |
They want as many desperate and poor citizens in America as possible so they
can line their pockets with the sweat off these people by using them for our
military, farm labor, sweatshops, factories, and whatever else suits.
Those that aren't rich but call themselves conservative are stuck in a fantasy
of the "American Dream" where they somebody own their own company and repeat
this inhumane slavery.
|
tod
|
|
response 27 of 331:
|
Feb 24 20:39 UTC 2006 |
re #25
Not killing them? Criminal homicide, mortality rates, and military enlistment
are all an indicator of the overall health of a community. It is
influenced by many factors, including the health of mothers and infants, the
quality of the health care system, mother's income and education, and numerous
aspects of the neighborhoods in which families live.
|
jep
|
|
response 28 of 331:
|
Feb 24 21:12 UTC 2006 |
re resp:21: I completely agree with you on that. It should be part of
the anti-abortion agenda.
|
tod
|
|
response 29 of 331:
|
Feb 24 21:21 UTC 2006 |
Yea, you're going to get a rapist or high school kids to foot the bills?
Nice pipedream. I guess if you like the insanity of overpopulated Catholic
countries then you can always move to Brazil or something.
|
jadecat
|
|
response 30 of 331:
|
Feb 24 21:24 UTC 2006 |
re #28- yes, but it isn't. And I haven't heard any of them touting the
responsiblity men have. It's all 'WE must save the innocent children!!!'
To hell with the woman and the guy? Who cares, could be anyone- we know
she was a slut to get pregnant, so it's HER responsibility and hers alone.
|
tod
|
|
response 31 of 331:
|
Feb 24 21:27 UTC 2006 |
"Should be" but isn't. The agenda is to punish women and make them 2nd
citizens. It seems to be working, too.
|
marcvh
|
|
response 32 of 331:
|
Feb 24 21:29 UTC 2006 |
Maybe if we let gay couples adopt them it would take up the slack.
|
tod
|
|
response 33 of 331:
|
Feb 24 21:35 UTC 2006 |
re #32
I see a compromise in there somewhere...
|
jep
|
|
response 34 of 331:
|
Feb 24 21:58 UTC 2006 |
re resp:30: If that was part of the anti-abortion agenda, would you
support it? It would seem to remove some of the stigma of anti-
abortion equating to anti-woman.
Am I anti-women because I am against abortion? I'm one of the few here
who are openly and vociferously anti-abortion. I sure don't think of
myself that way. I don't refer to unmarried pregnant women as "sluts",
or have any intention of punishing women for being pregnant.
|
kingjon
|
|
response 35 of 331:
|
Feb 24 22:03 UTC 2006 |
Re #34, last par., last two sentences: Same here; in fact, one of the people I
most respect in my church back home is a single mother (who's getting married
soon) with a disabled child. (I wouldn't refer to an unmarried woman that way
anyway because I wouldn't use that word in any case.)
|