Bans 'do not cut abortion rate'

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well to take one example they cite - they're right about Ireland - abortion is banned there but that hasn't stopped women there (several thousand per year) from travelling to the UK to have the procedure done there. There have been several landmark cases overturning rulings by Irish courts that attempted to bar women from travelling if it was suspect that they were going to have an abortion.

Well that has more to do with the accessibility to abortion not the ban of abortion. If abortions were banned universally do you really think the rate would go down.

Oh come on - that's pie in the sky. Abortion isn't going to be banned on a global basis - there will always be access to some neighbouring country or region that offers it legally, or to backstreet quacks who will do it illegally. Women even do it themselves.

Of course it never will be globally. My point was that this isnt just a matter of banning doesnt work, because it really hasnt been banned, sure in one country but you can go to another country and do it. Basically your trying to tell me that abortion rates would stay the same regardless to if Ireland banned them or not and thats the argument Planned Parenthood is trying to make, its ridiculous.

Irish courts do not have jurisdiction over British courts and [now] vice versa. The procedure is banned in Ireland, and abortions still occur. This is true in every other country where abortion is outlawed.

I know that and that was used in my argument. This takes nothing away from what I was saying.

Do you really believe that all the people in Ireland that want a abortion get it even though it was banned. To say the rate stays the same seems exactly like something planned parenthood would say.

That isn't what was being claimed.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Let us know when you, presumably a male, can get preggo.

and let me know what are some good reasons the unborn baby shouldn't have rights

[HAL 9000 96]

Until the law equals abortion to murder, your play with words is as lame as slinging toilet paper over the Dean's front yard.

That's a second for you. And not of the 'tard variety either.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Until the law equals abortion to murder, your play with words is as lame as slinging toilet paper over the Dean's front yard.

That's a second for you. And not of the 'tard variety either.

The fact that you're only logic is that it is legal and that liberals have no morals proves the opposition right.

[HAL 9000 96]

Well to take one example they cite - they're right about Ireland - abortion is banned there but that hasn't stopped women there (several thousand per year) from travelling to the UK to have the procedure done there. There have been several landmark cases overturning rulings by Irish courts that attempted to bar women from travelling if it was suspect that they were going to have an abortion.

Well that has more to do with the accessibility to abortion not the ban of abortion. If abortions were banned universally do you really think the rate would go down.

Oh come on - that's pie in the sky. Abortion isn't going to be banned on a global basis - there will always be access to some neighbouring country or region that offers it legally, or to backstreet quacks who will do it illegally. Women even do it themselves.

Of course it never will be globally. My point was that this isnt just a matter of banning doesnt work, because it really hasnt been banned, sure in one country but you can go to another country and do it. Basically your trying to tell me that abortion rates would stay the same regardless to if Ireland banned them or not and thats the argument Planned Parenthood is trying to make, its ridiculous.

Irish courts do not have jurisdiction over British courts and [now] vice versa. The procedure is banned in Ireland, and abortions still occur. This is true in every other country where abortion is outlawed.

I know that and that was used in my argument. This takes nothing away from what I was saying.

Do you really believe that all the people in Ireland that want a abortion get it even though it was banned. To say the rate stays the same seems exactly like something planned parenthood would say.

I see what you're saying. Non-medical abortions are most commonly practiced by those not able to afford the procedure where it is legal. Most women that are set on having one where illegal, can have it done regardless of the legal/health consequences.

[Peikko 1,575]

Let us know when you, presumably a male, can get preggo.

and let me know what are some good reasons the unborn baby shouldn't have rights

Think of the baby as the nonviable Siamese twin and you have your answer

[HAL 9000 96]

Let us know when you, presumably a male, can get preggo.

and let me know what are some good reasons the unborn baby shouldn't have rights

The female carrying it presumably would have a right to her body. Its really a novel thought for some to accept.

[_Simpson_ 250]

That isn't what was being claimed.

The rate doesnt change, that is what the survey is claiming, and Ireland was used as a example. People there will still have options but to say there will not be less abortions taking place is ridiculous.

[HAL 9000 96]

Until the law equals abortion to murder, your play with words is as lame as slinging toilet paper over the Dean's front yard.

That's a second for you. And not of the 'tard variety either.

The fact that you're only logic is that it is legal and that liberals have no morals proves the opposition right.

?

Liberals and no morals.

I sense Joe falling off the logic cliff today.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

Until the law equals abortion to murder, your play with words is as lame as slinging toilet paper over the Dean's front yard.

That's a second for you. And not of the 'tard variety either.

The fact that you're only logic is that it is legal and that liberals have no morals proves the opposition right.

Uh...ok... how does anything here proves liberals have no morals? You are the official VJ morality regulator?

As far as unborn fetuses (again, word play is lame); they have no rights since they are not recognize as human beings until X months of gestation. Get over it.

[_Simpson_ 250]

I see what you're saying. Non-medical abortions are most commonly practiced by those not able to afford the procedure where it is legal. Most women that are set on having one where illegal, can have it done regardless of the legal/health consequences.

What I am saying is that legalizing abortion is not the answer to the back alley abortion program. Also what I am saying is that it is morally wrong and we should stand up against it. Having a child is a huge responsibility and often people want a easy out and at the kids expense, sad. Sure theres a demand for it, so what doesnt mean that we should support the people who would do it regardless to if it was legal or not.

[HAL 9000 96]

I see what you're saying. Non-medical abortions are most commonly practiced by those not able to afford the procedure where it is legal. Most women that are set on having one where illegal, can have it done regardless of the legal/health consequences.

What I am saying is that legalizing abortion is not the answer to the back alley abortion program. Also what I am saying is that it is morally wrong and we should stand up against it. Having a child is a huge responsibility and often people want a easy out and at the kids expense, sad. Sure theres a demand for it, so what doesnt mean that we should support the people who would do it regardless to if it was legal or not.

Its not the answer for you, but you're not prone to getting preggo, so its not your right to impose using your standard of morality. Note I am addressing the imposition aspect of it, not the moral aspect of it (before some retard jumps in and reads using miscomprehension goggles).

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Until the law equals abortion to murder, your play with words is as lame as slinging toilet paper over the Dean's front yard.

That's a second for you. And not of the 'tard variety either.

The fact that you're only logic is that it is legal and that liberals have no morals proves the opposition right.

Uh...ok... how does anything here proves liberals have no morals? You are the official VJ morality regulator?

As far as unborn fetuses (again, word play is lame); they have no rights since they are not recognize as human beings until X months of gestation. Get over it.

Why don't we not recognize them as human until 2 years of age? That would help too..

Word play? We're calling a spade a spade. YOu want to call them fetuses and zygotes to keep your guilt at bay.

I see what you're saying. Non-medical abortions are most commonly practiced by those not able to afford the procedure where it is legal. Most women that are set on having one where illegal, can have it done regardless of the legal/health consequences.

What I am saying is that legalizing abortion is not the answer to the back alley abortion program. Also what I am saying is that it is morally wrong and we should stand up against it. Having a child is a huge responsibility and often people want a easy out and at the kids expense, sad. Sure theres a demand for it, so what doesnt mean that we should support the people who would do it regardless to if it was legal or not.

Its not the answer for you, but you're not prone to getting preggo, so its not your right to impose using your standard of morality. Note I am addressing the imposition aspect of it, not the moral aspect of it (before some retard jumps in and reads using miscomprehension goggles).

Then you shoudn't also impose child support payments after they are born since the man had no say in the birth.

[HAL 9000 96]

Until the law equals abortion to murder, your play with words is as lame as slinging toilet paper over the Dean's front yard.

That's a second for you. And not of the 'tard variety either.

The fact that you're only logic is that it is legal and that liberals have no morals proves the opposition right.

Uh...ok... how does anything here proves liberals have no morals? You are the official VJ morality regulator?

As far as unborn fetuses (again, word play is lame); they have no rights since they are not recognize as human beings until X months of gestation. Get over it.

Why don't we not recognize them as human until 2 years of age? That would help too..

Word play? We're calling a spade a spade. YOu want to call them fetuses and zygotes to keep your guilt at bay.

I see what you're saying. Non-medical abortions are most commonly practiced by those not able to afford the procedure where it is legal. Most women that are set on having one where illegal, can have it done regardless of the legal/health consequences.

What I am saying is that legalizing abortion is not the answer to the back alley abortion program. Also what I am saying is that it is morally wrong and we should stand up against it. Having a child is a huge responsibility and often people want a easy out and at the kids expense, sad. Sure theres a demand for it, so what doesnt mean that we should support the people who would do it regardless to if it was legal or not.

Its not the answer for you, but you're not prone to getting preggo, so its not your right to impose using your standard of morality. Note I am addressing the imposition aspect of it, not the moral aspect of it (before some retard jumps in and reads using miscomprehension goggles).

Then you shoudn't also impose child support payments after they are born since the man had no say in the birth.

Last most checked here, 2 years of age isn't X months of gestation. FAIL.

Yeah Joe, lets keep sliding down the slope on that one.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Let us know when you, presumably a male, can get preggo.

and let me know what are some good reasons the unborn baby shouldn't have rights

The female carrying it presumably would have a right to her body. Its really a novel thought for some to accept.

I think its fair to say that a fair share of pro choice people dont support partial birth abortion. I think its also fair to say that a fair of pro lifers would give the mother the option if her life was in danger, me being one of them. Now that we got that out of the way, biggest problem you have here is that her decision doesn't just affect her and thats huge, to treat this as just one person because of some sort of technicality seems dishonest to me.