Unnecessary. If I made abortion illegal, removed government interference in health care and health insurance, reduced taxation and job killing regulation and socialism, and promoted marriage and family, new mothers would have access to health care, a livable income, food, shelter, and all the other things you think are only possible with a government program.
That doesn't answer my question. This is a question that has 2 possible answers: yes, I would be willing to do that; or no, I would not. Simple.
Great answer frgough
false dichotomy, seriously
7truth, this is not a false dichotomy. This is negotiation. You want abortion banned, but you don't seem to be willing to give anything up to do so. You seem to think calling people sinners, evil, whatever will change their minds. Or showing atrocious acts which are so extreme, you lose viewership because of the graphic content. You all seem to think that yelling the same thing over and over again will change people minds. It won't. You're not providing any alternatives and you're not willing to go to the negotiation table.
While my point is a hypothetical, it illustrates your positions problem: you want your cake and to eat it too. If you're serious about ending abortion, you'll start providing real negotiations. Until then, you'll frequent this blog, talk with your friends, and be "disgusted" with society. You will do this, even though you could be working towards a real solution.
You present a false dichotomy. There are other choices. I do not need to shout, or convince. Neither is required. There is no justification for intentionally killing an unborn innocent, defenseless, unique, individual human being. Even removing all assistance for mothers and children could not be used to justify killing children.
This is not a negotiable position
Then, 7truth, you stand no chance on ending abortion. If you're not willing to come to the negotiation table and work something out, you'll never, ever end abortion. It doesn't have to be my plan, although I'd like for people to debate that part as it's a viable option, but you will need to be willing to negotiate. Otherwise you're just serious about being mad about abortion, not about actually ending it.
ending abortion is not my job. i just present arguments about why is a horrible and evil practice, which victimizes moms and kills babies in the most horrible ways imaginable. It will end one day. Someone way stronger will handle that.
There is no negotiable position, wherein abortion can be acceptable as an option. There is no "if you will compromise this, we will stop this." Abortion is an evil. We either have the courage to end it, or we don't
7truth, OK, you clearly have not been reading what I'm saying. I am saying abortion would be ended with an agreement that most "pro-life" people are generally against. As I've stated, negotiations are going to need to happen otherwise you will not get what you're pushing for.
Also, if this isn't your job, why do you care so much?
Again, your dichotomy is false. The position you present is not the only one, and most certainly not the best.
You ask for compromise when there can be none. it is not justifiable to say " if you guys can't agree to this, then we will keep abortion." If our culture does not have the decency to simply say "abortion kills innocent human beings" and stop it, then some hypothetical compromise that actually surrenders more of what makes us great and good is meaningless.
Abortion is the intentional killing of an innocent, defenseless, unique, individual human being. It cannot be justified.
Failure to provide for the mother does not justify killing the baby.
Never handing another piece of birth control does not justify killing the innocent in the womb.
Not having any healthcare whatsoever is not justification for killing the innocent.
So your hypothetical compromise is moot, because of what the unborn are, and what abortion is. We either have the decency and courage as a culture to end it, or we do not.
ABortion kills babies. it harms women in very real ways. It harms fathers. it cheapens and demeans life. It lessens the humanity of us all by devaluing life, and removing personal responsibility, and....by not valuing the most innocent the right to live.
That is why I care. that is why I do what I can (which is far more than I am willing to discuss here, for the record.)
OK, 7Truth, you are just dumb. I am not justifying abortion. You're reading what you want.
I have given a plan to end abortion. You are saying, "We won't accept your offer to end abortion! We must end abortion at all costs, so we can't accept your offer to end it!"
That is what you're saying. You say we must end it all costs, but you won't go to the negotiating table. If you were serious about ending it, you'd be willing to negotiate a compromise that ends abortion and gives liberals something they want. However, you appear to be too dense to realize your own words. You sort of know what false dichotomy means, but you don't seem to understand "at any cost". Any cost, once again, means negotiation.
never said you justify abortion. Said that it cannot be justified. Said the compromise positions you presented were not the only ones, and not the best. Said that any compromise position that depends on yielding other things that make us great and good is not good. Said that the whole discussion is moot, given what the unborn are and abortion is. Standing by that.
Will present a better idea. Stop promoting sex to kids in every part of culture. Stop lying to them about abortion, and about the risks of sex. Stop lying about safe sex. Stop mocking abstinence and personal responsibility. Begin promoting abstinence, and its values, accross culture. In all media show it for what it is. It works 100% of the time, for eveyrone who uses it. It costs nothing. It has no side effects. It has no short or long term negative impact. It promotes self control, self respect, self sacrifice,elevating the person, and the other. It promotes all the best character qualities we would aspire to, and have our kids aspire to have.
Liberals will never compromise on abortion, or any other thing they want. Compromise is always giving them what they want.
My word, abortion kills innocent babies in the womb! it harms women. Why do we need a compromise of any kind? End it! It has no place in any civilized society. End it before it degrades humanity, and our culture, any further
Serisouly - Nice try, but your question choice is wrong because your premise is wrong! Your 2 options are NOT the only options available. Frgough correctly identified other viable choices that you completely ignored. And besides, if you defund PP & decide to send those funds to another abortion clinic, we would be funding the same horrible practices we have seen PP doing. If you watch those videos, read the titles of the executives being interviewed. Some of them are the heads of the abortion-providing community at large, not simply PP. Frgough and Matt Walsh are both correct. Incidentally, are you still under the mistaken belief that Planned Parenthood clinics provide mammograms and prostate checks, etc? You would be wrong. They all REFER those requests out. Getting a license to perform mammography is a very serious, complicated, & expensive process and requires a specially trained technician as well as a radiologist trained specifically to read mammograms. Their personnel must notify patients of results using a very strict protocol. If a single step of the mammogram is done sloppily, it could result in misdiagnosis and death -- which ironically is the GOAL of an abortion clinic. Ask Hillary, Chelsea, Elizabeth Warren & Nancy Pelosi where they get their mammograms (or Bill Clinton his prostate checks....) and I can assure you that it is not at a Planned Parent clinic! There is not a single PP clinic licensed for mammograms in the USA.
 July 3, 2015 at 1:30pm
Suggest you go back and read a book on basic human biology, focusing on the chapter on sexual reproduction. Because then you won’t sound like such a fool when you go around denying basic biological science.
 July 3, 2015 at 1:29pm
Actually, the sin you are illustrating right now is bearing false witness. Because your accusations are just that. A false witness.
Archeology is most definitely a very soft science. For the simple reason it’s almost impossible to do any sort of laboratory experimentation to independently verify your claims.
When you assemble bones and then take a vote to see if you did it right, you barely qualify as scientific.
 June 9, 2015 at 10:52pm
Except, apparently, the lifetime of soft tissue.
 June 9, 2015 at 10:51pm
No, the evidence suggests that our dating techniques are horribly inaccurate and the bone is not 75 million years old.
Real scientists aren’t afraid to go where the evidence leads. If chemistry tells us soft tissue can’t survive for 75 million years, and we find soft tissue in a bone dated to 75 million years, then the only conclusion you can reach is that the bone is either contaminated or is not 75 million years old. There are no other options.
June 9, 2015 at 10:48pm
Or more likely, TheMotWay, our dating techniques are horribly inaccurate and the bones are not 75 million years old, but instead a few thousand.
But nobody wants to follow the evidence precisely because that would be the conclusion.
 June 9, 2015 at 10:46pm
Laws of chemistry. That’s why not. If these folks were the least bit scientific, they would be jumping up and down in excitement because finding the soft tissue means their dating techniques are completely wrong and everything they thought they knew needs to be completely re-examined. True scientists would be unable to contain their excitement at the possibility of overturning and entire paradigm.
 June 9, 2015 at 10:41pm
While you are proudly touting your moral scientific superiority, you might want to take time to consider the chemical impossibility of any sort of soft tissue surviving for 75 million years.
Finding any type of soft tissue, in a truly scientific discipline, would be incredibly exciting, on the order of discovering red shift being caused by something other than expansion of the universe, because it would overturn an entire accepted understanding of how we thought things were.
True scientists find that exciting.
In simpler terms: soft tissue in dinosaur fossils is smoking gun evidence that the fossil is not 75 million years old, or even a million years old, or even 100,000 years old. In fact, it would be a stretch to consider it 10,000 years old.
'In simpler terms: soft tissue in dinosaur fossils is smoking gun evidence that the fossil is not 75 million years old, or even a million years old, or even 100,000 years old. In fact, it would be a stretch to consider it 10,000 years old.'
But, the dates test at 75M years and '..we have discovered structures reminiscent of blood cells and collagen fibers in scrappy, poorly preserved fossils'. So, yes, how did this happen?!? Yet something else to investigate! I posted above a response with a good vid at least explaining some of the dating methods. I hope you'll give it a listen so you will at least know what Science does have to say on the subject.
The scientists pretty clearly state that remnants of soft tissue are known to survive occasionally in ancient fossils, and these are indeed small remnants.
If you really want to go with numbers, Yuka the wooly mammoth is 39,000 years old and has quite a bit of soft tissue still intact!
Science cannot date anything with accuracy according to the methods it uses. All of them use multiple untestable, unproven, and often factually incorrect assumptions to arrive at a date. Science can, with great precision measure and count isotopes, but it cannot say anything about history because no one can go back and take initial measurements. Evolutionary scientists make assumptions based on the evolutionary timeline in order to prove the evolutionary timeline...it's textbook circular reasoning.
 June 9, 2015 at 10:21pm
False Dichotomy is the mating cry of the liberal.
 June 9, 2015 at 10:20pm
That’s not why he was hired. He was hired to curry favor with government. In today’s America, if you want your business to survive, especially if you are being targeted like McDonalds by the Michelle Obama’s food nazi corps, you need to establish the right political connections.
Don't care if that's the reason, McDonald's can't possibly believe they are doing a good thing by hiring Obozo's first cheerleader!
Bingo! You can debate the character, ethics, etc of such a hire, but it is all subordinated to the politics. McDonalds is desperate to save their company as profits fall. Ironically, their focus on the Me generation has backfired and only brought them employee problems as well as making their restaurants a hood hangout or gathering place for a brawl. They are now focusing on the mechanics of business which, today, includes political favor in order to survive. This too will likely fail them as their food prices soar to pay for the regulations and $15/hr employees. I say, good riddance and goodbye!
 May 15, 2015 at 9:56am
A woman is happiest when she makes family her career. Ditto the man. Men are happiest when they can provide and protect. Women are happiest when they can support, nurture and care. It’s a wonderful system when you let it work.
 May 15, 2015 at 9:52am
Here’s a better idea. Realize that your daughters are happy playing with dolls because women like to nurture and care. So instead of trying to make them like a man who loves engineering and math, and thus implying that men are inherently superior, celebrate the uniqueness that is womanhood.
LOLOLOLOL I know lots of men who don’t like engineering and math. And women who do. Someone gave my daughter a Barbie doll for her 3rd birthday. She looked at it, tossed it over her shoulder, and never looked back. She is currently an engineering student and doing very well, and more importantly, really enjoying it. She is also an incredibly kind , considerate and nurturing person. Just like her brother. Are you really implying that women don’t like and can’t be good at engineering and math? That’s going to come as quite a surprise to many female engineers, doctors, scientists, etc. By the way, all of my kids, boys and girls, are really good at math. Me, not so much. But I don’t think they are inherently superior to me…just different interests and talents. I celebrate each of them for their uniqueness and don’t put false constraints on them. Luckily they do the same with me.
[-1] April 6, 2015 at 11:02pm
Translation: You will get your mind right, or we’ll mob you.
[-1] April 6, 2015 at 11:01pm
Again. We are talking about not wanting to participate in an EVENT. I doubt you are actually too stupid to get this, so you must be deliberately misrepresenting what is being discussed.
[-1] April 6, 2015 at 10:59pm
Since no one is actually doing that, what, exactly is your point? The bakeries in question didn’t want to participate in an EVENT.
[-2] April 6, 2015 at 10:57pm
A “gay” Christian wouldn’t call himself a “gay” Christian. He would simply call himself a Christian. Because he would understand that his defining characteristic is his discipleship to Christ, not his sexual appetites.
[-1] April 6, 2015 at 10:56pm
The answer is the same one I give to Muslims. It doesn’t matter. Because it is the extreme element of your ideology that drives and controls the agenda.
But to say that the majority don't feel as strong about the issue, it is just the minority.. How is that extreme... Just like the majority of Christians are nice people that continue their daily lives with out being so dramatic about so many issues not looking to stir up trouble I don't feel is so extreme. And also what "agenda" are you referring to?
[-1] April 6, 2015 at 10:54pm
Once again. This is not about refusing service to a person, but refusing to participate in an EVENT.
April 6, 2015 at 10:30pm
Right. Because as we throw off more and more of the chains of religion in the United States, life has become so much more wonderful. Crime is down, families are stronger, honesty is on the rise, selflessness and charity are exploding, self-reliance, dignity and work ethic are on the rise, life is valued more and more, compassion for others above self is becoming more and more pronounced. Why, we’re on the verge of utopia.
Crime rates are down. Abortion rates are the lowest they have been since Roe v Wade. Overall, I'd say compassion is much higher these days as people include more and more others in their circle of humanity.
Since when did Blaze start to attract so many libturds!? Religion isn't down, as you may have led to believe, it's up! Way up! Churches are packed tighter than ever, more and more millenials everyday! Don't believe everything you tead, even mr, see for yourself, you'd be extremely surprised to see whom you'd find at your local church. Jesus lives! Sin No More!