Texas bans abortion.

[psionl0]

I wonder if the anti-abortion crowd would be upset if they ordered a chicken dinner at a restaurant and was presented 3 eggs with a side of lettuce seeds and raw potatoes.....

This thread has degenerated into mostly making up accusations regarding the shortcomings of a couple of posters who are attempting to defend a right to life position (HOW DARE THEY!)

But when you start making coal=diamonds or eggs=chickens (or embryo = adult human being) you have officially dug through the bottom of the barrel. Nobody could possibly believe that this crap is a valid argument.

 

[acbytesla]

I'm not saying too much about her, compared to the press. I linked some articles. Even the CEO of Planned Parenthood is lobbing criticism at Sanger. I mean, as I say, at what point do people stop being apologists?

You were the same person who said it was unfair to judge the founding fathers because they owned slaves. Something like (you can't judge it because it was a different time) And here you're attacking Sangor over a very nuanced position on Eugenics?

You will excuse me for finding your desperate reliance on an ad hominem to be pretty sickening.

 

[Warbler]

Why else would they believe in a Heaven? What evidence is there of one?
None.

Faith isn't about evidence.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to believe in that. I'd love to believe that we'll all be together again, young, healthy etc. But I also realize that is a 'want' and nothing more. But I also want to believe that I'm never going to grow old even in the facing of doing exactly that.

We know we will grow old and die. We don't know scientifically whether or not there is a heaven. (unless you can prove scientifically that heaven does not exist)

But what is wrong is when people try and force their religious beliefs on others who don't agree as in the anti-choice people who are largely basing it on their religious beliefs.

1. I don't force my beliefs on anyone else. I know the horror that has been wrought in the world people/groups of people/governments trying to do that. One could argue that people trying to force their beliefs on everyone else is why Jesus was crucified. He was preaching something other than the officially accepted religion at the time and so, he had to be stopped.

2. Look at all my posts in this thread, I never once tried to use my religious beliefs to justify any stance I have on abortion.

She was having marital problems and would later divorce. But the hysterical reaction to anyone even questioning Jesus' divinity sent her into a tail spin. Her 'crutch' was being undermined and she couldn't handle it.

Maybe, or maybe her other problems played a bigger role in the hysterical reaction than you think. In any case, I guarantee you, not all Christians would get hysterical and go into a tail spin just because some book club was hypothetically asking what if Jesus was not real.

 

[Warp12]

And here you're attacking Sangor over a very nuanced position on Eugenics?

You will excuse me for finding your desperate reliance on an ad hominem to be pretty sickening.

First, I am not surprised at your position, as you have praised the benefits of population control as related to abortion.

Secondly, the articles I linked have some of Sanger's quotes and other information that explains why even the CEO of Planned Parenthood has spoken out against her views. Believe me, there are plenty more articles and quotes out there that cast a shadow upon her.

I don't need to condemn her personally; there are plenty of other people who have convincingly made the case. The funniest part is that it was portrayed here that this was a right-wing thing...but then that argument collapses when even Planned Parenthood is taking a critical stance towards Sanger.

 

[Dr. Keith]

I'll put you down as another endorsing no restrictions on term of gestation.

Was the math too hard?

 

[thaiboxerken]

First, I am not surprised at your position, as you have praised the benefits of population control as related to abortion.

Secondly, the articles I linked have some of Sanger's quotes and other information that explains why even the CEO of Planned Parenthood has spoken out against her views. Believe me, there are plenty more articles and quotes out there that cast a shadow upon her.

I don't need to condemn her personally; there are plenty of other people who have convincingly made the case. The funniest part is that it was portrayed here that this was a right-wing thing...but then that argument collapses when even Planned Parenthood is taking a critical stance towards Sanger.

So your argument is that Sanger was a racist, therefore abortion is wrong? That's a very dumb argument.

 

[Stacyhs]

Faith isn't about evidence.

Obviously not.

We know we will grow old and die. We don't know scientifically whether or not there is a heaven. (unless you can prove scientifically that heaven does not exist)

I'm not holding my breath for that! I don't have a death wish!

1. I don't force my beliefs on anyone else. I know the horror that has been wrought in the world people/groups of people/governments trying to do that. One could argue that people trying to force their beliefs on everyone else is why Jesus was crucified. He was preaching something other than the officially accepted religion at the time and so, he had to be stopped.

2. Look at all my posts in this thread, I never once tried to use my religious beliefs to justify any stance I have on abortion.

I was making no aspersions on you personally. I'm referring to groups like the Right to Life people and legislators who most definitely are doing so by passing laws like the one in TX.

Maybe, or maybe her other problems played a bigger role in the hysterical reaction than you think. In any case, I guarantee you, not all Christians would get hysterical and go into a tail spin just because some book club was hypothetically asking what if Jesus was not real.

True, I've known believers who are quite sensible and private about their faith. They don't push it on anyone. But I have to say, I do resent having people ring my doorbell to ask me if I've 'heard the Good News'.

 

[Stacyhs]

First, I am not surprised at your position, as you have praised the benefits of population control as related to abortion.

Secondly, the articles I linked have some of Sanger's quotes and other information that explains why even the CEO of Planned Parenthood has spoken out against her views. Believe me, there are plenty more articles and quotes out there that cast a shadow upon her.

LOL! And I debunked the ones you presented that were either partial quotes, taken out of context or just plain lies by presenting the entire quote and in context.

I also posted evidence that she was not seen as a racist by leading Black leaders of the time like DuBois, Mary McCleod Bethune and Adam Clayton Powell Sr. If he thought Sanger was a racist, would Martin Luther King, Jr. have written this for his wife, Coretta, to read in accepting the Margaret Sanger Award in 1966 while he was in jail?

There is a striking kinship between our movement and Margaret Sanger’s early efforts. She, like we, saw the horrifying conditions of ghetto life. Like we, she knew that all of society is poisoned by cancerous slums. Like we, she was a direct actionist — a nonviolent resister. She was willing to accept scorn and abuse until the truth she saw was revealed to the millions. At the turn of the century she went into the slums and set up a birth control clinic, and for this deed she went to jail because she was violating an unjust law. Yet the years have justified her actions. She launched a movement which is obeying a higher law to preserve human life under humane conditions. Margaret Sanger had to commit what was then called a crime in order to enrich humanity, and today we honor her courage and vision; for without them there would have been no beginning. Our sure beginning in the struggle for equality by nonviolent direct action may not have been so resolute without the tradition established by Margaret Sanger and people like her. Negroes have no mere academic nor ordinary interest in family planning. They have a special and urgent concern….

[O]ne element in stabilizing his [sic] life would be an understanding of and easy access to the means to develop a family related in size to his community environment and to the income potential he can command.

https://civilrightsadvocacy.net/201...planning-a-special-and-urgent-concern-speech/

I don't need to condemn her personally; there are plenty of other people who have convincingly made the case. The funniest part is that it was portrayed here that this was a right-wing thing...but then that argument collapses when even Planned Parenthood is taking a critical stance towards Sanger.

No, the anti-choice crowd have presented lies and dishonest out of context partial quotes in order to vilify a woman they hate. And the CEO of PP has fallen for it in an effort to be seen as "politically correct".

You don't have to resort to lies and half-truths when truth is on your side. Lies like attributing quotes to her she never made and photoshopping her into a KKK rally. You don't need to lie that she was 'associated with white supremacy groups" or called for killing babies after birth or was a Hitler style eugenics supporter. You only need to resort to those kinds of lies when the truth doesn't support your agenda.

 

[Stacyhs]

More evidence that the anti-choice's and your claims are false, Warp:

It is well known that the Nazis later adopted their ideas on race from American eugenicists. When they notoriously burned books, the works of Margaret Sanger were included among those tossed into the flames. They did not like the fact that she had written that birth control aimed at making life better for women and that it was absolutely intolerable to use it to reduce the numbers of people in so-called inferior races or the members of minority religious groups.

At Sanger’s direction, drawing from her years as a labor organizer, the clinics were integrated with Black and white staff—nurses and doctors. In establishing these clinics, she had not only the support of many white women, like Flynn of the Communist Party, who counted among her financial and activist supporters but also the NAACP co-founder W.E.B. Du Bois, Paul Robeson, Rep. Adam Clayton Powell, Mary McCloud Bethune, and some pro-labor activist Black ministers who would eventually invite Sanger to come and speak to their congregations.

Du Bois and those Black ministers’ support is important. It was in a 1939 correspondence with one of her friends that a passage has been taken out of context to haunt Sanger ever since. She wrote: “… We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the [Black] minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members….” She was discussing her visits with some Black church congregations.

Her words were chopped down and manipulated to: “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.” This dishonest excerpting is offered as proof of her supposedly racist beliefs.

Challenged once to explain her stance on eugenics, Sanger was clear: “If by ‘unfit’ is meant the physical or mental defects of a human being, that is an admirable gesture, but if ‘unfit’ refers to races or religions, then that is another matter, which I frankly deplore,” she said in 1934.
Admittedly, even Sanger’s qualification for “physical and mental defects” is abhorrent today, but our evolved social attitudes toward the disabled or physically challenged are barely 30 years old, dating back to the 1990s Americans with Disabilities Act and slightly earlier struggles in public education to provide schooling for all children. Further, I argue her use of the term “racial betterment” in her memoir, writings, and speeches—even to Black congregations—bears the broader connotation of the human race, not a narrow ethnic one.

https://www.peoplesworld.org/articl...r-are-cover-for-right-wings-assault-on-women/

So go on, Warp, tell us all again how Sanger was a racist. You've failed to produce ONE piece of actual evidence that she was a racist. At what point do you open your eyes and stop repeating disproven lies?

 

[The Great Zaganza]

"Sanger was a racist" is an off-the-shelf argument offered on right-wing/religious sites to attack pro-choice proponents with; it's not a serious argument, but it does tell you where the person making their argument is getting their information from.

 

[catsmate]

Hitler started the first public anti-smoking campaign.

Everyone currently posting in the thread without a cigarette currently in their mouth, I will assume to have murdered 6 million Jews.

Ah, the German Association for Combating the Dangers of Tobacco. Obviously a front for Sinister Experiments into Things Man Was Not Meant To Know. Is it coincidence they were based at Castle Itter?

So are any vegans.

Or anyone who drives a VW.

And people with dogs.

 

[Paul2]

What part of Sanger's beliefs don't justify getting rid of disorders post partum?

All of them, as far as I can see.

 

[Paul2]

I'm not saying too much about her, compared to the press. I linked some articles. Even the CEO of Planned Parenthood is lobbing criticism at Sanger. I mean, as I say, at what point do people stop being apologists?

When they actually listen to the historical evidence and not use an argument from authority (Planned Parenthood).

 

[JoeMorgue]

Faith isn't about evidence.




We know we will grow old and die. We don't know scientifically whether or not there is a heaven. (unless you can prove scientifically that heaven does not exist)




1. I don't force my beliefs on anyone else. I know the horror that has been wrought in the world people/groups of people/governments trying to do that. One could argue that people trying to force their beliefs on everyone else is why Jesus was crucified. He was preaching something other than the officially accepted religion at the time and so, he had to be stopped.

2. Look at all my posts in this thread, I never once tried to use my religious beliefs to justify any stance I have on abortion.





Maybe, or maybe her other problems played a bigger role in the hysterical reaction than you think. In any case, I guarantee you, not all Christians would get hysterical and go into a tail spin just because some book club was hypothetically asking what if Jesus was not real.

Oh well this just took a hard left turn into toon town.

 

[thaiboxerken]

"Sanger was a racist" is an off-the-shelf argument offered on right-wing/religious sites to attack pro-choice proponents with; it's not a serious argument, but it does tell you where the person making their argument is getting their information from.

It's also ridiculous coming from a person who adores Trump and the Trumpublican party.

 

[JoeMorgue]

It's also ridiculous coming from a person who adores Trump and the Trumpublican party.

It's the same ole', same ole'. Actual rolling dumpster fires would disown their daughters if they married Trump, but Trump doesn't need to be "taken down a peg" for the sin of having standards but not being perfect.

 

[Stacyhs]

I'm still waiting for the prestige to provide anything from Sanger's own words that she, in any way, supported "getting rid of disorders post partum".

All I hear from him is

 

[Dr. Keith]

Oh well this just took a hard left turn into toon town.

I mean, at least he was clear about faith not relying on evidence. That’s progress.

I skipped the rest of his post though, did it not follow that assertion to some logical conclusion? Like: and therefore faith has no place in deciding what the law of the land should be.

 

[Warbler]

Obviously not.

I remember a line from the original "Miracle on 34th Street":

“Faith is believing when common sense tells you not to

I'm not holding my breath for that! I don't have a death wish!

I don't have death wish either.

I was making no aspersions on you personally. I'm referring to groups like the Right to Life people and legislators who most definitely are doing so by passing laws like the one in TX.

While I am opposed the Texas Law, the question is did they base their justification of it, on their religious beliefs?

But I have to say, I do resent having people ring my doorbell to ask me if I've 'heard the Good News'.

part of the price we have to pay for things like freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Part of freedom of religion is the freedom(within in reason) to attempt to spread your religion to others. There are of course limits. Like if you tell them to leave, they have to leave.

 

[Stacyhs]

I remember a line from the original "Miracle on 34th Street":

“Faith is believing when common sense tells you not to

"Religion is the opiate of the masses"
“Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable.”
"Science adjusts its views based on what’s observed. Faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved."

While I am opposed the Texas Law, the question is did they base their justification of it, on their religious beliefs?

Not formally because they knew that would get it overturned. They're much more subtle than that. But the anti-choice movement is lead by religious people. I don't think you can deny that.

Bryan Hughes is the TX state senator behind the new abortion law. It was his bill. Let's take a look at Hughes' FB page and see if we can figure out if he's influenced by his faith:

Bryan Hughes
Otctober 3 at 9st6:4772ao6ur 0fAM ·
But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.
**1 John‬ *1:7‬‬

Bryan Hughes
0mSiepi7pt7embetor 2161 oca3tu 05lg:5d9 AM ·
Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children. And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.
**Ephesians‬ *5:1-2‬‬

Bryan Hughes
tSept1fem8mboen15sr 712 oa2t5r e539d3:391 AM ·
Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God.
**Philippians‬ *4:6‬‬

part of the price we have to pay for things like freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Part of freedom of religion is the freedom(within in reason) to attempt to spread your religion to others. There are of course limits. Like if you tell them to leave, they have to leave.

I never said they don't have the right to "attempt to spread their religion" through free speech. But I DO have a problem with them trying to force their religiously based ideas on me through legislation. Which is exactly what these abortion restrictive laws are. So were the laws prohibiting same-sex marriage, "blue laws", inter-racial marriage, and several sex acts occurring between consenting adults related laws .