Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • They are no more pro-life than anyone else. Those who favour reproductive rights don't want people to die either. The so-called "pro-life" crowd who would remove reproductive rights are far better described as being anti-choice and anti-human-rights.
    • If you start calling pro-lifers anti-choice, expect to be called an anti-life : that's how doublespeak works. Rhetoric battles aren't won this way, and bad advocacy is worse than no advocacy at all. If you want to argue against pro-lifers, analyze their arguments and demonstrate fairly and confidently why they're built on wind. Don't get lost on sterile disputes about the exact moment of the pregnancy where a foetus becomes a baby.

      The main (only?) argument of the rabid pro-lifers is that killing early foet

      • Now let's just ask what's best. Medicalized abortions, or clandestine ones ?

        What's best: that armed robbery should be legal, or illegal? That question makes as much sense as yours. If abortion is the unethical taking of an innocent human life, then it should be, under most circumstances, illegal. That's only logical.

        And that's why the current form of abortion, in our current civilization, is considered ethically acceptable and harmless.

        Not in my current civilization. In the US, most people think abortion is harmful and unethical. It only continues to be legal because they also think, as cwest expressed, that it is a personal matter, not for the government.