I’m having a discussion about abortion, 140 characters at a time. So far the discussion has stretched over 3 days.
I started it. I’ll call her Tweeper. (My observations in pink)
MHM: No taxpayer funding of abortions! Make Mommy Dearest hire her own hit man!
Tweeper: dont cry to me when you have given away your rights to the government and htey tell you what to do in another area of your life
Alianna was always a human being
Tweeper: that is YOUR belief.. and Roe v Wade is based in solid legal principles that are unwavering and unmoveable.. read it.. (Law trumps all.)
Tweeper: so you believe that YOUR morals and decisions are the ONLY right ones? Who do you think you are?
Tweeper: How do you know that the person who believes YOU are wrong and they are right is not the one who is really right?
Tweeper: morals are NOT universal and never can be if it were we would not be having this discussion others do not agree with you
Tweeper: the government has no place in deciding about issues involving personal issues.. pretty clear in the contitution.. and in law (Don’t tell me what to do or enforce your morality on me)
MHM: but the feds have a duty to protect its citizens lives and to keep up from killing each other.
MHM: You do not, then, have the right to make a decision for another human – a life or death decision. (Why do you force your morality of choice on the unborn?)
MHM: How do I know the other person isn’t right… when it comes to killing human beings… I’ll risk being wrong and protecting them.
Alli didn't magically become a human being when the umbilical cord was cut.
Tweeper: fine but you can’t make that decision for someone else… that is the point I am trying to make..
Tweeper: IF that human is within the body of someone else that person has the right to remove it.. and always will…(admits unborn baby is human)
MHM: has the right to remove it- after it can survive. To arbitrarily remove the baby’s life support for no reason is murder.
Tweeper: they have the right to have it removed at any time.. it is impacting their health.. and their life not yours..
MHM: It may temporarily impact a woman’s health, but death is forever. Killing a human being, who has committed no crime, is wrong. (Killing a human being is wrong.)
Tweeper: many women would rather be jailed than pay costs incurred they were forced to incur another drain on society..(ignored my statement that killing a human being is wrong. Or did she? Women would rather be jailed – for what? I should have asked what crime they would be in jail for. Murder?)
MHM: another drain on society – is that how you see babies? How very sad. Could you send me link for stats of women preferring jail?
Tweeper: so in essence you have no idea what will happen to these unborn fetuses after birth.. nor do you care… you can’t force love (she hasn’t sent me a link to stats yet. Instead, change subject. Now I don’t care about babies)
Tweeper: women who are forced will have no insurance.. no maeans to pay for services.. the government will pay the cost.. (New straw man argument – can’t have a baby without insurance)
Tweeper: I see reality.. the poor unable to find safe abortion blocked from birth control due to finances.. no education in prevention.(New straw man argument – it’s not their fault.)
MHM: not sure what financial status has to do with whether ending life of human being is right or wrong. Wrong if you’re rich OR poor. (Killing a human being is wrong.)
MHM: you don’t know that I don’t care or don’t help. It is wrong to kill people.
MHM: It is wrong to end someone’s life because they don’t have insurance. Especially an underage minor. (Killing a human being is wrong.)
Tweeper: your pie in the sky stance does not work in the real world. Not everyone thinks the same as you.. the choice is theirs to make
Tweeper: you may consider it wrong.. but if someone does not have insurance the costs are astronomical..
MHM: astrnomical costs??? to have a baby?
MHM: I do know that with support women can be good mothers. Adoption waiting lists are long. there aren’t enough babies to go around!
MHM: no insurance IS NEVER a reason to end the life of a human child. (Killing a human being is wrong.)
MHM: to be more clear. It is wrong to end the life of a child, a minor, simply because they don’t have current insurance. (Killing a human being is wrong.) (Are you sensing a theme here?)
Tweeper: wow you are blinded aren’t you.. the rich will always be able to have safe abortion.. the poor will not if it is not legal (change subject, make it a class issue.)
Tweeper: so you don’t care about women.. at all.. all you care about is your romantic veiw of a “baby” and can’t see the real issue here (Personal attack, but didn’t address real issue. Is killing wrong?)
Killing innocent human beings is always wrong.
MHM: blinded? how? It doesn’t matter, rich or poor. Killing a human being is wrong. Abortion is always unsafe for the child. (Killing a human being is wrong. Not a class issue.)
MHM: Abortion ALWAYS has a 50% fatality rate.
MHM: half of those babies are female. The issue is, it is always wrong to kill a person.
MHM: that is the real issue. Killing a human being, or not killing them.
Tweeper: so it’s ok that women who have been blocked from birth control, and education must conform to YOUR morals? (Ignored the issue again.)
Tweeper: People want healthy babies what about the “saved” babies who are deformed or special needs? there are thousands of those already
MHM: there is a huge waiting list for Down Syndrome babies. Special needs babies are no less human than other babies.
MHM: No one should kill a human being. Poor, rich, blocked from BC, or fully insured. No one should kill human being. (Killing a human being is wrong.)
Tweeper: a fetus is not under the very root of our laws a human being your moral view does not impact a woman who is pregnant at all (The law says it’s okay. So it is.)
Tweeper: no matter how flawed your view is here I do wish to thank you for a discussion with out personal attacks.. Thanks! (Wish I could say the same.)
Tweeper: Downs babies are not on any huge list that is why there are hundreds in state care as well as medical needs and behavioral needs
MHM: thanks. My argument is simply it is always wrong to end the life of an innocent human being. How is that flawed?
Tweeper: because it is always wrong according to YOU it does not fit the sense of right and wrong of others
Tweeper: so what you are saying is that a woman who can not prevent becoming pregnant should be forced to risk her health?
Tweeper: ok for arguement sake you do not use birth control and are raped you will die if you carry a child is that the gov decision?? (Appeal to emotions. Does the circumstance of conception make the baby any less human? It is always wrong to kill an innocent human being.)
Government should protect ALL humans. Government shouldn't force me to pay for killing innocent human beings.
MHM: you don’t agree that killing a human being who has committed no crime & is innocent is always wrong? Sometimes its okay to kill?
MHM: say you are helpless, and depend on others for life support but just for a few weeks. Should Gov make decision to kill you?
What would YOU say to my tweeper? This is someone I never talked to before.
Veronica (3)
kat (2)
Kristin (2)
Raso @ lasagnarec... (2)
drew (1)
Elise (1)
Grandma Margie (1)
Heather (1)
{ 15 comments… read them below or add one }
Oh. My. Goodness. The faulty logic, the straw man arguments…. I’m impressed that you handled this one so well!
‘Tweeper: so what you are saying is that a woman who can not prevent becoming pregnant should be forced to risk her health?’
Wouldn’t a woman put her health in far greater danger by the act of ‘not preventing pregnancy’ than by carrying a baby? Since when has a normal pregnancy been considered a health risk to the mother?
‘Tweeper: they have the right to have it removed at any time.. it is impacting their health.. and their life not yours..’
If pregnancy is not a health risk (as we know), then the concern is over the impact a child has on ‘their life.’ Why not change the law to ‘remove’ children who have already been born? What’s the difference to Tweeper?
You did a great job in this discussion. I applaud your patience, knowledge and consideration. Keep on keeping on.
And there’s the rub with late term/partial birth abortion. If a baby can safely be partially delivered, it can be entirely delivered. No need for the killing part of it to ever take place.
And here’s a new question – should abortion be forbidden, but induced labor at 24 weeks be allowed if the mother requests?
Aargh! These conversations are so frustrating. It’s like plaiting fog, they run you up and down the banks and will not be still for a minute and actually have an honest exchange about what abortion means.
I only know ONE person who has ever been willing to say ” Yes, abortion is murder and I am in favour of murder in special circumstances”
Which strikes me as honest at least.
This is a very good radio debate which is worth listening to:
http://kgov.com/bel/20081202
Ilana Goldman on Bob Enyart Live.
…One of Eight “Women to Watch:” according to the Washingtonian, Ilana Goldman, president of Women’s Campaign Forum, is one of the most powerful women in Washington. Ms. Goldman advocates the “right” to kill a fetus. Bob Enyart asked Ms. Goldman a number of questions which she did not answer including “What is a fetus?” and “Is the fetus living?” Ms. Goldman argued for a right to terminate it, but insisted on avoiding a discussion about what “it” is. Ms. Goldman indicated there should be a right to kill “it” because there are strong emotions on both sides, and because many people want to kill “it.” Ilana did not agree when Bob said that whatever the truth is –whether “it” is a baby or not– should take precedence over emotion and opinion. Bob Enyart said to Ilana, “Abortion is wrong because it’s a baby, it’s always wrong to intentionally kill a baby,” to which Ilana said that we should respect one another’s views, to which Bob asked, Well, isn’t it relevant whether or not the fetus is a baby, a question Ilana objected to.
It’s worth a listen for the simple and lucid way in which he lays out his position.
Look at all those sweet pics! How did Mr. R get so grown up!!! I’m missing you guys so much right now.
Wow – I missed this whole exchange in my busyness. Way to go – you are always a class act.
It will always be wrong to kill an innocent human being.
Abortion advocates love to appeal to the concept that aborted babies are so often a result of rape and life threatening to the mother – which couldn’t be more wrong.
And, in response to your new question about induced labor – it would be SO much better but I hate to think at 24 weeks because those babies suffer so much. Life is so hard for them that early – maybe after 30 weeks.
It’s so sad that a mother would deliver and kill that child instead of deliver and sign papers to relinquish the child. This issue is heart breaking to me. It’s just so sad. God bless those little ones. I pray that he spares them the certain agony they face.
I actually read this out to my husband. I just don’t get the mindset of these people – it just doesn’t make sense.
On the option of adoption, I know someone who set up a pro-life pregnancy centre and he said you have to be very careful about suggesting adoption because if the mother considers adoption, it can reduce the parental connection they feel with the child and therefore make them more likely to abort as they no longer feel the same parental responsibility.
When I worked as a counselor at a crisis pregnancy center, more than once I heard a woman say “I could never give my baby up for adoption” as a reason they were choosing abortion.
Golly, doesn’t that look like fun.
I guess I am eternally grateful I don’t do twitter.
IMO, argument will never do it for someone like this — not that I don’t think you did great to try. Thing is, we don’t do argument in this country — no such thing as debate and rhetoric and logic. What we do is decide from self-interest what we want to believe, and then flail about finding reasons of one kind or another to support our decisions. So you can knock down every point she makes, she just dredges up new ones because she’s not after the truth, she’s just looking for props for her prejudices.
I think this all comes back to authority. If God were not the ultimate authority, I understand their logic. I have an atheist friend who is OK with abortion but not OK with elimination of elderly. He recognizes these two killings are the same except one is early in life and other other later in life, but he’s made it past the infant stage, so he is “safe” from abortion. Since he believes we’re all headed to nothingness, he is not that concerned about other human life. I know many think there are no true atheists, but just sharing his logic.
But God is the creator of life and the ultimate authority. Every person will bow to Him one day, regardless of their current beliefs. It is so sad that our society is shooting up the middle finger to God and I’m concerned about His judgment on our nation. I think our current gov’t is part of that judgment. How long will He let a country exist that kills babies? We’ve killed more babies than Hitler killed Jews. Blows my mind.
When we speak up in a culture that rejects God’s authority we will be persecuted. You were persecuted on Twitter. It is a glimpse, I believe, of much greater persecution to come. Now have a good day:)
“Tweeper: because it is always wrong according to YOU it does not fit the sense of right and wrong of others”
In the Constitution of our country it says something along the lines of, “Man is endowed with certain INALIENABLE rights…the right to LIFE, LIBERTY and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS” She’s already agreed that a fetus is a human-therefore, in this country at LEAST, they are endowed with the INALIENABLE right to life.
“Tweeper: ok for arguement sake you do not use birth control and are raped you will die if you carry a child is that the gov decision??”
So you punish an innocent child of the crime of the father? What about the children of serial killers, or wife-beaters, or drunk drivers, or drug dealers? Should we then kill them because their fathers are not good men? So if we disagree with Obamacare, we should punish Sasha and Maliyah?
(sp?)
“Tweeper: a fetus is not under the very root of our laws a human being your moral view does not impact a woman who is pregnant at all ”
Oh really? So what about blacks when THEY weren’t people under our law? It was okay to lynch them, even if they were innocent? So, you’re basically saying, all the discrimination, bigotry and hatred/racism that blacks have suffered in this country under the slavery laws etc was OKAY? So the Indians, “not people either” under the law for a long time, it was OKAY that we murdered and raped their wives and children and drove them from their homeland into relatively tiny patches of the most barren and desolate land our country has to offer? So the Sand Creek Massacre was JUSTIFIED? What about the Trail of Tears? Are you saying that, since many civil rights laws weren’t in effect then, Rosa Parks, Harriet Tubman, and all those who helped the Underground railroad “weren’t human beings”? Touchy words, my friend.
I can only pray that Tweeper does not “get it” that a preborn baby is a human being. Sometimes it actually takes becoming a parent for this to hit home on an emotional level. And sometimes not, sad.
I love reading the debates you get into…I’m so non-confrontational myself, I tend to leave the arguments to those with the wit and intelligence and energy to do battle with numbskulls.
Aliana is gorgeous!
That thing about insurance is just bogus. I have had three babies with no insurance, and they were all very helthy and as of today we owe no money to anyone for medical treatment, including for our fourth baby that won’t be delivered for another 7 weeks. And we’ve never taken public aid for anything even though we’re legally below the “poverty line”. It can be done.
A couple of our babies were born without insurance, as well.
No insurance means baby should die? I agree, – that’s a little extreme!