The thing is persuading people over time is better than making a law that bans. There is a lot less visible slavery now, same with cannibalism. Sure there is a 'ban' but was it the law or the common sense that is really banning it? Wage slavery is very real still, did minimum wage help much at all?
Laws are great at gray areas, like you can have abortions before x weeks and not after. Laws are not great at bans, like lets ban murder, doesn't work? ban guns, doesn't work? ban aggressive males, doesn't work? etc but age of consent or drinking? great!
So to the point, telling pregnant mothers they are wonderful and it's gonna be great to have mini them running around the world, and you and many will help them raise the kid will work way better than laws.
Poor women in bad areas often have low self esteem and support which make abortion a very real choice. For example, if you think your kid is gonna be the next Trump, you'll die for that baby right? but if you think you are nothing the father won't be there and the kid is probably not far from the tree then...it's sad.
I don't necessarily disagree. In fact, I've made similar arguments over the years. Remember when the argument was "Well, abortion sucks, but it's necessary"? Yeah, that's went out the window now. "Let's celebrate our 19th abortion on Twitter! sponsored by Google! Yay women!"
I still think you're arguing semantics, though. But it's not an invalid approach, I guess.
You do you. If it works for you, you're doing God's work. Despite your well-reasoned argument, I would, myself, still consider any sort of abortion ban a success.
Think of it this way, if it is God's work, learn all the ways to communicate with someone. Learn all the semantics if needed.
My point is what is posted will not succeed in swaying people. Something like: Planned parenthood made 1.67 billions in 2017-2018 & 79% of their surgical abortion facilities were within walking distance of African American or Hispanic communities.
How do we feel about profiting off of abortions? what would Jesus say?
And then Amazon and Netflix step up with their funding abortions plan, like Bloomberg add him paying off his felon's fines so they can vote.
And we're right back to where we started from.
But I don't disagree with your premise of defunding abortions. It's a start.
Your argument is like saying, "Let's stop funding slavery! But banning slavery? WHAAAT? No one likes bans!"
Still, I don't disagree entirely. But I can always see a devil's advocate position. I'd still prefer to have it banned outright.
The thing is persuading people over time is better than making a law that bans. There is a lot less visible slavery now, same with cannibalism. Sure there is a 'ban' but was it the law or the common sense that is really banning it? Wage slavery is very real still, did minimum wage help much at all?
Laws are great at gray areas, like you can have abortions before x weeks and not after. Laws are not great at bans, like lets ban murder, doesn't work? ban guns, doesn't work? ban aggressive males, doesn't work? etc but age of consent or drinking? great!
So to the point, telling pregnant mothers they are wonderful and it's gonna be great to have mini them running around the world, and you and many will help them raise the kid will work way better than laws.
Poor women in bad areas often have low self esteem and support which make abortion a very real choice. For example, if you think your kid is gonna be the next Trump, you'll die for that baby right? but if you think you are nothing the father won't be there and the kid is probably not far from the tree then...it's sad.
Most people should have problems of PP making 1.67 billion last year of of aborted babies, then contributing to democrats.
I'll leave the pro life or pro choice bs argument to someone else.
Since when are we ok with solving social problems by ending the life of the innocent?
Society would do really well if we could just kill off a few million people.
Hmm.
I don't necessarily disagree. In fact, I've made similar arguments over the years. Remember when the argument was "Well, abortion sucks, but it's necessary"? Yeah, that's went out the window now. "Let's celebrate our 19th abortion on Twitter! sponsored by Google! Yay women!"
I still think you're arguing semantics, though. But it's not an invalid approach, I guess.
You do you. If it works for you, you're doing God's work. Despite your well-reasoned argument, I would, myself, still consider any sort of abortion ban a success.
Think of it this way, if it is God's work, learn all the ways to communicate with someone. Learn all the semantics if needed.
My point is what is posted will not succeed in swaying people. Something like: Planned parenthood made 1.67 billions in 2017-2018 & 79% of their surgical abortion facilities were within walking distance of African American or Hispanic communities.
How do we feel about profiting off of abortions? what would Jesus say?
IMHO is more effective in reach and persuasion.
See,I disagree that it's not persuasive.
I've seen no evidence to support your claim, and I've never even heard it before you, at least in terms of this specific phrase - "anti-murder."
Persuasion is one level, one tactic, say. Legal redress is another. Both support a strategy of no (minimizing) non-therapeutic abortions.
Maybe use a condom or birth control. Or don't be a hoe.
Hey, I can do that too.
Sun hot
Sky blue
Grass green
Blm marxist