How can you be 'pro-life' and 'pro-war'

I am all for abortion and against illegal war in Iraq, donno what that makes me but I am firm in what I believe.

All for abortion bcoz it's the person's choice wether she want's to give birth or not, I don't have a right to tell her to go thru 9 months and give birth to a baby that the person herself doesn't want.

War on Iraq = based on lies, torture, illegal, profit oriented, bloody hypocrasy.

Originally posted by washingtonsghost
With all the uproar over the potential for state funded abortion, I was wondering where are all these 'pro-lifers' are with regards to the US state funded terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq? What about the real Iraqi and Afghan children that US tax dollars are killing and injuring in the thousands? I think when God said 'thou shalt not kill' he also meant dont bomb the s@%t out of people. I for one am sick of the hypocrisy!

Do you have an event or news item that substantiates this?

Since when has there been a correlation between Pro-Lifers and Pro-War ??

Seems like a rhetorical question to make an argument out of thin air.

Here's mine.

Since when do Anti-Coverup establishments coverup the fact Milk causes car accidents?!

And it's a known fact that most people who are involved in car accidents have drunk milk prior during the day. Indisputable evidence. But it's never mentioned.

Why?

(carry on, that was sarcasm aimed at the rule here about certain topics et cetera, et cetera )

(fixed of to or, hate my fingers)

[edit on 17/11/2009 by Ha`la`tha]

reply to post by washingtonsghost


This is how you can be pro-life and pro-war:

You can be a hypocrite - like all the churches and most religions.

You can be a man telling someone he has got pregnant to get rid of it, then turning round and opposing war.

Or you can just be an idiot.

Originally posted by Seiko
reply to post by 12GaugePermissionSlip

 

To be fair there are organizations that offer to raise a child rather then see them aborted. They are few and far between, but they do exist.

Yes, I know all about one of them.

In 1973, when I was a single, pregnant, 19 y o student, my mother pressured me to let a medical couple she knew look after the baby's adoption. They delivered the babies in their surgery and kept everything very quiet.

I felt I was going to be forced to give her up, so I went interstate and raised a baby in extreme poverty rather than risk those people getting their hands on her, because I had a really bad feeling about them.

It later came out that they were stealing babies for a religious sect called "The Family", located quite close to where I was living. A woman had been set up a Jesus returned, and followers were given babies with false birth certificates to help raise.

These kiddies were drugged and tortured from infancy, and there are dark stories about what they were used for.

Many years later I encountered the woman reputed to be this sect's leader, and had an opportunity to get her rolling drunk. She merrily blurted out to me all sorts of details about being run by "the people that run the CIA and did Jonestown," who she said supplied the drugs they used. She was certain this organisation was going to gain control of the world through the Bush family, and gave hints of something terrible happening in the future which I now believe were referring to 9/11.



So Seiko, please do tell us about the organisations you say exist which offer to raise your child for you. I'll be interested to see what you can come up with.

Some people see these terms as forms of political framing. Not political trolling, but political framing.

Both "pro-choice" and "pro-life" are examples of terms labelled as political framing: they are terms which purposely try to define their philosophies in the best possible light, while by definition attempting to describe their opposition in the worst possible light. "Pro-choice" focuses on the fact that the alternative viewpoint, on this issue, is "anti-choice", while "pro-life" implies the alternative viewpoint is "pro-death" or "anti-life". Similarly each side's use of the term "rights" ("reproductive rights", "right to life of the unborn") implies a validity in their stance, given that the presumption in language is that rights are inherently a good thing and so implies an invalidity in the viewpoint of their opponents. The Associated Press encourages journalists to use the terms "abortion rights" and "anti-abortion" [continued...]

Pro/Anti Term Controversy

---------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by crw2006
Ive often wondered how some people could be for the death penalty but against abortion or for abortion but against the death penalty.

As you can see there is major hypocrisy on both sides of the issue.

I also used to be very confused by these seemingly contradictory views. I believe the best way to explain using purely logic and not emotion is as follows (these are NOT my views, but I think this is where some people are coming from):

- Abortion is terminating a Life that has not had the opportunity to live and flourish as a human being. These potential individuals are free from moral judgement because they have not done anything that warrants taking their life away before they have had the chance to take a moral action.

- The Death penalty is seen as a way of removing from society and our world, individuals that have caused death or great harm to other people. Morally, this individual has chosen to a path and should suffer the consequences of their actions. Tax payers should not have to fund the life of somebody who has chosen such a path and hurt others so badly. There is also the issue of re-offending in the future if parole is given to those serving time for serious crimes. This has happened enough times in the past to warrant general concern for the community whose lives' should not be put at risk by allowing a convicted criminal the opportunity to re-offend.

As I said, these are not my own views on abortion and the death penalty, but I feel the above perspectives reflect where people are coming from when they say they are "pro-life" yet also "pro-death penalty".

[edit on 17/11/2009 by Dark Ghost]

reply to post by washingtonsghost


I have to say I'm not necessarily all that thrilled about the so-called "war" in the middle-east either. I'm not the kind of Christian that is gung-ho about ANY kind of war.

HOWEVER.

IF there ever was a true cause for war, it would be either to protect the innocent who are weaker than us, or to protect ourselves. There is a difference between saving a person which has yet to do something wrong or harmful and saving a person who is hell-bent on destruction and death, without an ounce of forgiveness or awareness as to the right to live for other human beings.

Meaning.. I would kill someone if there were 10 people who were about to get blown up by the one. I would not, however, attempt to kill any innocent life. Of course, the term innocent is relative, but it still stands that an unborn child is innocent. As with adults, the term innocent is relative to the situation. Who is innocent in THIS situation? Because no one is innocent. Are the Afghani's innocent? I'm sure innocents have died in this so-called war, which nullfies ANY good that anyone claims to have gained from it. Are the Iraqi's innocent? I'm sure that innocents have died in this so-called war, which nullifies ANY JUSTIFICATION.

War can be justified, but that doesn't mean it is right now.

reply to post by Dark Ghost


You've summed it up pretty well. The pro-life crowd can be in support of the death penalty because the truth is, the dilemma presented is a false one. Pro-life is a label that refers *only* to the abortion issue and you've summarized the major reasons why a person can easily hold those views and still be logically consistent.

Its similar with the war. I don't think you'll find many people who are 'pro-war', but instead who believe that war is justified for various reasons, primary among those the belief that inaction will ultimately cost more lives than the war otherwise would.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox
I think I'm going to have to diasgree with you. Those of us who don't believe in abortion are not about restricting women or punishing women for an immoral lifestyle. I can only speak for myself. As a conservative, I believe that the life of an unborn child should be protected too the fullest extent possible. There is one exception. Abortion should be allowed when the life of the mother is in danger. But, even then, it should be the mother's decision. The daughter of a very good friend recently spent the majority of her pregnancy on complete bedrest. She could only get up long enough to go the the bathroom, or to move to the couch in the living room. She carried the baby long enough for it to be delivered by C-section, even though her blood pressure stayed extremely high throughout the pregnacy. She was at risk for a stroke for nearly the whole time she carried the child.
she is now the mother of a beautiful baby boy. She could have aborted the child. But she chose to put her life at risk to bring a new life into the world.
I happen to believe that women should stay home and raise their children, although I realize that, in this day and time, it is not possible.
I support the death penalty, and find it extremely logical to punish certian crimes by taking the life of the person who committed the crime. In the case of scumbag who raped and killed the the tv news reporter, I beleive a mistake was made in giving him life without parole. The nature of his crime was such that I feel he should have been put to death. Child molesters should be put to death. Those who engage in acts of terrorism agains the United States whether they participate, or whether they plan the acts.
Unfortunately, the shooter at Fort Hood will probably not get the death penalty, because he is being tried under military law, and the prosecutors are not well versed in trying cases of this nature. There is no doubt the man is a murderer. There is no doubt, at least in my mind, that the man is a deranged muslim jihadists of the home grown type. We will see more attacks of this sort in the near future. If you have a concealed carry permit, I would start using it, if I were you. If you don't have one, and your state allows it, I would get one. It might save your life.


[edit on 17-11-2009 by kettlebellysmith]

i'm against the death penalty. i don't believe in literal war. i think the leaders should meet each other in a digital field of battle and work out their differences there. real dead bodies do not an enlightened statement make. i don't believe in assisted suicide. i don't believe in euthanasia. and i don't believe in abortion (unless the woman's life is in danger. also if she has been raped, because the blood is then on the hands of the rapist, however, rape is hard to prove. would take so long to prove it, baby would already be born). in that order.


[edit on 17-11-2009 by undo]

reply to post by washingtonsghost


I'd think this would be elementary my Dear Watson . .. . However, evidently not, for many . . .

1. There IS EVIL in the world.

2. Evil IS intent on death and destruction.

3. Evil does NOT respond meaningfully to "Pretty Please, don't kill me."

4. Evil only responds to force.

5. IF a deadly destructive force is intent on destroying you and your family . . . not to mention your country and your way of life . . .

IF you don't stand up and be counted and MEANINGFULLY DEFEND YOURSELF, YOUR FAMILY, YOUR COUNTRY AND YOUR WAY OF LIFE

THEN

you probably aren't worthy of any of the above.

It doesnt make sense to me either. however i could shoot someone fatally out of selfdefense or in protection of someone innocent and not bat an eyelash, yet to kill an innocent child whether american/ afghani, unborn or born is just evil and id rather be dead than a party to that.

I am a pro life feminist (no opression for men, women, or even the unborn fetus). I am not against abortion in the case of medical emergency or when the fetus will die a slow death once born (spine on the outside).


I am against the death penalty for the fact that I'm pro life as well as the statistics say that it raises crime rates(murder rates) and does not work as a solution. In Canada where I live, there is no death penalty.

I am against war that is not in self defense. I am against wars where people are killed in the name of gaining resources.

oh and i am for the death penalty. thats not random or geered towards the innocent. its against those who who exploit innocence, not protecting it as they should.

reply to post by Kailassa


wow!

reply to post by washingtonsghost


Ask the direct opposite question and you will have your answer. How can people claim to be anti-war yet stand by and let the war on the unborn continue?

reply to post by Carseller4


very well said.

Just because the words are opposites, does not mean the meanings are...

Why does everyone play with words so much?

Pro-life is the same as anti-abortion. Reasons for this could be because someone was an orphan, possibly have been aborted, believe fetus's are people and should have the choice themselves, religious reasons, WHATEVER.

There are LOTS of reasons to be pro-life (I am pro-choice FYI).

Pro-war could be out of nationalism, ignorance, the like to kill, knowledge that it can make ones country's economy better, or it does not matter.

I am against violence, but would kill an intruder in my house if they are about to hurt my family. Call my a hypocrite if you wish, because I stand proudly by it, but you need to learn situational characteristics before making more obnoxious threads.

reply to post by Titen-Sxull


I would like to know how you feel about the pro choice/anti death penalty stance. Personally I feel forms of hypocrisy in peoples belief are pretty standard these days. I believe it is a mute point. Who cares what someone else thinks as we all only have control over our own lives. You can try to change their opinion if you feel it is stupid, but the freedoms of this country allow people to have the stupidest opinions in the world, while also allowing them to freely express it. Like Elton John saying he thinks gay marriage is waste of time, doesn't really make sense but that is just the way it is.