Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire For All the Planned Parenthood Haters

The fetus is human. The dog analogy is inaccurate. It's more akin to blacks and women who once had no legal rights. Was that right when that was the case?

The fetus is a human baby; a human child. At this point, any injury or death to the child is a crime, unless committed by the mother. Please explain specifically how this is Constitutionally, morally, or ethically valid.

When you resort to Nazi comparisons, you're admitting you aren't capable of thinking of a logical, original reply.
No one said the fetus wasn't human.
It's just not yours, so you have no say in the matter

Ah, then let's try this one: since the child is also "the father's", how is it that the father has no say in the matter? If it is legal, moral, and ethical in your view for a mother to be able to kill the child prior to birth, how is it not also legal, moral, and ethical for the father to do the same? Remember there is that pesky Constitution in there as well as a host of other anti-discrimination laws (as well as common morals and ethics) that preclude different treatment or rights/privileges between the sexes.

Actually, ismith is far more correct than incorrect given the history of Planned Parenthood and the Nazis.

According to history, he's quite a bit more correct than not.

You have compared the child, legally, to a dog and not a human. Now, at least you concede that the child is, in fact, human. Therefore, your dog analogy fails and it falls back to the comparison between blacks and women again. At one time, a black owned by someone else wasn't "any one else's", either. Was it right to allow this to continue? Or, should other people have simply kept their mouth shut because that wasn't theirs? Ditto the same about women previously?

You keep repeating yourself

The father has no choice because he's not the one taking all the risk.

The unborn child still has no rights, just like the dog example I used.

The Nazi crap is exactly that....crap

Slavery was legal, but now it's not

Abortion was illegal and now it is

Both are improvements, whether you happen to agree or not

Snyper,

A fatal flaw with your position is that you must admit that the child is human. From that, all else for you fails.

The child is human. Because it has it's own unique DNA for a human, it is then a distinct individual human and is not simply a "growth" or "part" of any other human. It is alive and a separate human being on it's own.

You cannot, then, continue to refer to that child as "someone else's" to do with as they choose. Your assertion reduces the child to the status of mere property. This cannot be. The only way for a distinct, individual human being to be the mere property of another to be disposed of as they see fit is via slavery. That is specifically outlawed in the United States. There is no other way for a person to possess another human as mere property other than by definition through slavery.

So, please continue now that you have (and must) admit that the child is, in fact, a distinct individual human being.

Margaret Sanger was part and parcel of the Nazi planning, and the creator of Planned Parenthood for the same reasons; eugenics. This is historical fact.

The dog analogy fails because the child is, as you admit, human.

Because something is legal, or illegal, does not make it morally or ethically right. This is entirely the case in point, and thus the references to blacks and women formerly having no rights is accurate. You cannot simply dismiss those points as they are pertinent to the issue at hand.

The father is, in fact, taking substantial risks in the case of the child. However, that is irrelevant to the discussion as it is illegal to discriminate between the sexes, illegal to give rights and privileges differently between the sexes, and if under your concept the child is mere property of the mother then it is equally so property of the father based upon biology and the anti-discrimination laws.

In light of this, please continue.

A pregnant woman has three choices.

1 Raise her baby.

2 Kill her baby.

3 Allow someone else to raise her baby.

Assume she doesn't want to raise it. Also assume there is no detectable childbirth health risk. What possible argument is there for death over adoption?

To save her from hurt feelings because someone else is loving her child? She would rather kill her baby than have it live with someone else?

I understand giving a woman a couple months to make up her damned mind but after that it's a viable human life. A woman's free choice isn't between Coke and Pepsi, Iphone or Android, it's rather to kill her child or give it away.

So,paddler how come you will not post pics of your Caprivi?

It's top secret special custom.

In 17HMR.

With the extra thick Pachmayr recoil reduction system.

And it cost him 25k.The scope is a LeuZeiSwa 1x-75x that speaks German & English. It also converts meters to yards and vice versa.

He reloads his cartridges for maximized performance.

And has BDC and ft/lb impact charts out to 4000 yards/meters.
In English and German.

Snyper - clearly 4ager has completely dismantled your position.

You say the fetus is human. If, as you also say, no one other than the mother has any right to decide the fate of this human being through possible abortion, why then is it not the sole "right" of any mother to kill a child once it is outside the womb?

P.S. - it already has been established that legality alone is not a substitute for morality or ethical behavior.

Speaking of curves, you just joined Safariman as being one of the most hated people on the fire....Uber congrats???

I will say this much. I do not stand that abortion is always illegal, unjust, or immoral. As a staunch defender of the right to self-defense, I apply the same standard to this situation. If the life of the mother is clearly in jeopardy, then she has the right to defend herself including the use of deadly force.

Oh, and in the leftist standard "rape and incest" argument (less on 0.01% of all cases of abortion), the same standard applies - the pregnancy is the result of an act of violence. The resultant pregnancy can be aborted in the earliest possible days by use of a pharmaceutical.

You guys still beating on old peepee pants? Too funny.

most hated or most laughed at???

no one comes close to being laughed at on my computer as does Padidler...

I mean, I like Schtick.. but he's nowhere near living in the real world....

but Padidler is off the charts on being in touch with the real world... he doesn't even live on the same planet as we do...

if something happened to Schtick that he got hurt or put in the hospital, I'd be concerned for the guy, and wish him well, and hope he'd recover quickly as possible...

something happened to Padidler, and he got hurt or put in the hospital... I'd think "it couldn't happen to a more deserving guy".. and wishing him well or a quick recovery wouldn't even cross my mind...

I don't hate Padidler, just would like to see him find another web site to be a pompous ahole on, instead of here...

Yup.

ya mean you guys don't????

Mine are both in sophisticated English ( like the Rich in London Speak)... and in HochDeutsch.. Plus Parisian French...

I deleted the Espanole Option...hear enough of that in line at Walmart.. whether its good Spanish or Bad Spanish.... its an irritating language to my ear...