It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by PurpleChiten
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
See, that's one of the problems. The picture you posted isn't from an "abortion". The radical right wing does this often. they take the pictures that are the most grotesque and attribute them, falsely, to abortion.
Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by PurpleChiten
I think I see the idea of choice a little differently than you do. As you say, I might be one of those on the religious right that don't understand that, so I'm asking for help understanding.
Everyone I know is in favor of choice, so am I. By "choice," I mean freely selecting from among various options. Sometimes these options are limited by law. I could use some money, but blackmail and armed robbery are not among the options I'm free to choose from. As far as I can see, the abortion question is whether or not to include medically unnecessary abortions as one of the various options we are free to choose from. It seems more appropriate to label the two groups pro-abortion and anti-abortion, since it's not choice which is being debated but whether abortion should be an acceptable option.
Because we don't live in a dictatorship or monarchy, the people have a voice in the laws we live under. Those same laws describe what the acceptable options are from which we may choose. Except for laws which are considered to be unconstitutional, we are free to encourage or ban what we wish. We are also free to change those laws, and to try to persuade people to join our side.
Your last paragraph seems a little over-heated, but what the heck, it happens to all of us.
With respect,
Charles1952
Originally posted by Annee
Originally posted by PurpleChiten
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
See, that's one of the problems. The picture you posted isn't from an "abortion". The radical right wing does this often. they take the pictures that are the most grotesque and attribute them, falsely, to abortion.
Yes Purple.
And - - - I know there are some Pix the anti-abortionists love to use over and over - - that came from a back alley illegal abortion clinic.
edit on 12-11-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by PurpleChiten
People who support the option of keeping abortion legal are NOT anti-life, not at all, so that side of the argument cannot be labeled as such. If they were anti-life, they would want to destroy all living things and that's not the case.
Furthermore, those who wish to keep abortion as a legal option aren't neccesairly supporters of abortion nor would the neccesairly have one themselves. They support it remaining a choice. Therefore, the side is "pro-choice". Those who do not want it to be a choice are "anti-choice", not "pro-life", especially since they are also the biggest proponents of the death penalty....
Quote from Bone75www.abovetopsecret.com... www.abovetopsecret.com...
[image removed by staff]
Now let's talk about that picture for a minute and compare what you can plainly see with your own eyes to what's coming out of your mouth (I know, its another metaphor).
First a little about the picture, and by the way, thank you GideonFaith for sharing this in another thread.
The hand in the picture is that of Samual Armas at 21 weeks from the moment of his conception. He is undergoing surgery to correct his spina bifida, while still in his mother's womb.
Your entire argument is that life begins upon birth and the first breath...
So by your logic, when Samual gets older and someone asks him if he's ever had surgery...
he should say no?
those who wish to keep abortion as a legal option aren't neccesairly supporters of abortion nor would the neccesairly have one themselves. They support it remaining a choice. Therefore, the side is "pro-choice". Those who do not want it to be a choice are "anti-choice", not "pro-life", especially since they are also the biggest proponents of the death penalty....
I see a human being grasping the hand of the surgeon.
Originally posted by otherpotato
reply to post by GideonFaith
I see a human being grasping the hand of the surgeon.
It's a reflex. Completely automatic, primitive response. I believe they call it the Palmar Grasp Reflex. Makes for a nice photo op but doesn't prove anything.
Originally posted by GideonFaith
Originally posted by otherpotato
reply to post by GideonFaith
I see a human being grasping the hand of the surgeon.
It's a reflex. Completely automatic, primitive response. I believe they call it the Palmar Grasp Reflex. Makes for a nice photo op but doesn't prove anything.
You still didn't answer the question about the surgery. Now I have more questions since you seem to know what happened in the operating room with Samuel, his mother and all the doctors and nurses. Can you prove it was just a reflex? Were you there? Did you see it happen? If not, then you are grasping at straws.
Originally posted by PurpleChiten
Originally posted by GideonFaith
Originally posted by otherpotato
reply to post by GideonFaith
I see a human being grasping the hand of the surgeon.
It's a reflex. Completely automatic, primitive response. I believe they call it the Palmar Grasp Reflex. Makes for a nice photo op but doesn't prove anything.
You still didn't answer the question about the surgery. Now I have more questions since you seem to know what happened in the operating room with Samuel, his mother and all the doctors and nurses. Can you prove it was just a reflex? Were you there? Did you see it happen? If not, then you are grasping at straws.
Well, unless it popped up out of the womb and shouted "Yo, Dude! Wassuppppp!", then yes, it was a reflex.
(not to mention another issue all together that may make us think it was demonically possessed)
Even babies that have been born have those reflexes, they don't "know" to grasp with their hands, it's a reflex action. Even animals have the reflexes. It was a reflex.
Are you trying to assert that it was knowledgeable of what was going on outside the womb, made a conscious decision to reach out and grab the guy's finger as if to shake hands? Something even a toddler doesn't know to do at times? Are you trying to say that this is a "gifted" fetus beyond the level of what some teens are? Why would you think it was anything OTHER than a reflex??
Have you been performing satanic rituals and called forth a demon to possess the body of the fetus in hopes of better serving your evil overlord satan?? I mean, come on, there aren't a lot of options here when it comes to even a newbor baby, let alone a fetus inside the womb....
Originally posted by otherpotato
reply to post by GideonFaith
I see a human being grasping the hand of the surgeon.
It's a reflex. Completely automatic, primitive response. I believe they call it the Palmar Grasp Reflex. Makes for a nice photo op but doesn't prove anything.
Originally posted by Bone75
Originally posted by otherpotato
reply to post by GideonFaith
I see a human being grasping the hand of the surgeon.
It's a reflex. Completely automatic, primitive response. I believe they call it the Palmar Grasp Reflex. Makes for a nice photo op but doesn't prove anything.
Whether it was a reflex or not is irrelevant to the question posed.
I have a feeling that someone who refers to babies as parasites is going to have that pic removed, so a timely response would be appreciated.edit on 12-11-2012 by Bone75 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Annee
reply to post by PurpleChiten
I don't see how you are ignoring the question.
Seems to me you answered it just fine.
But - GF used that same tactic on me because apparently my answer was not acceptable
Originally posted by otherpotato
reply to post by GideonFaith
You want me to look at that photograph and answer if a reflexive grasp indicates proof of a soul? Fine: no it doesn't
So by your logic, when Samual gets older and someone asks him if he's ever had surgery...
he should say no?
I ask you the same question. If this child has no soul and is not a human being, then my vision must be broken. I see a human being grasping the hand of the surgeon. This is a living, breathing human being.
How should he explain surgery done on him, since he supposedly has no soul?