Just T
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,884 
|
Post by Just T on Jul 19, 2018 2:47:25 GMT
Even though I am pro-life, I CAN understand why some people would HAVE to have one. I had to counsel one of my own daughters once. She was carrying triplets, and the sonogram showed that one of them had died, and the other two were conjoined. She was counseled by her doctor to get a D&C. Even though I'm pro-life, I told her whatever decision she made, that she was always my daughter, and that I'd always love her, no matter what she decided. It was up to her and I supported her decision for a D&C. As it was, before the day she was supposed to have the D&C, all three babies had died. It made it much easier for her to handle. Another daughter had a tubal pregnancy--and almost lost her life before they figured out what was going on. SHE considered that an abortion, which it wasn't in MY head, because the baby was in the tube where it couldn't grow. But she had guilt about that for several years anyhow. So, yes, there is a place for abortions. (IMO) That doesn't change my pro-life stand, but I guess I'm a compationate pro-lifer. One of the reasons I am pro-choice. In Oklahoma, 1929 during the depression (think “Grapes of wrath” ) my great Aunt Eva was 28 years old. She had 5 kids, including twin boys who had been born the year before. She was suffering from the baby blues (what we know now is postpartum depression). Her husband was doing the best he could to feed and care for them but he was sick and there was no work. They were not doing well and often went without food. Eva became pregnant again. She could not imagine another child to feed. So she did what she thought was best for her 5 children. She went to her mother’s house where she died a few days later. About a year later her husband died. The 5 children were split up and taken in by family members. The newspaper reported she died of a spider bit, but her family knew she had a back alley abortion. Another reason, my cousin and his wife were pregnant with their much wanted baby. The baby had anencephaly (I think that’s what it was) and after much consideration they with their Dr. decided to have an abortion. But they lived in Oklahoma. They could not get one here. So they had to fly to another state. I'm against abortion. I wish there was no need for one. But I will always be pro-choice. I have to agree with rodeomom. Donnie, that is the epitome of being pro-choice. There really is no black and white...there is lots of gray in the middle. The gray in the middle is why I am and will always be pro-choice. |
|
Just T
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,884
|
Post by Just T on Jul 19, 2018 3:04:49 GMT
Even though I am pro-life, I CAN understand why some people would HAVE to have one. I had to counsel one of my own daughters once. She was carrying triplets, and the sonogram showed that one of them had died, and the other two were conjoined. She was counseled by her doctor to get a D&C. Even though I'm pro-life, I told her whatever decision she made, that she was always my daughter, and that I'd always love her, no matter what she decided. It was up to her and I supported her decision for a D&C. As it was, before the day she was supposed to have the D&C, all three babies had died. It made it much easier for her to handle. Another daughter had a tubal pregnancy--and almost lost her life before they figured out what was going on. SHE considered that an abortion, which it wasn't in MY head, because the baby was in the tube where it couldn't grow. But she had guilt about that for several years anyhow. So, yes, there is a place for abortions. (IMO) That doesn't change my pro-life stand, but I guess I'm a compationate pro-lifer. @donnie I think this is the very definition of pro-choice. You don't like abortion but your were there for and supported your daughters choice to have one. That should be a decision between her and her DR. Being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion. We just want everyone to have the right to decide what is best for them. One of the reasons I am pro-choice. In Oklahoma, 1929 during the depression (think “Grapes of wrath” ) my great Aunt Eva was 28 years old. She had 5 kids, including twin boys who had been born the year before. She was suffering from the baby blues (what we know now is postpartum depression). Her husband was doing the best he could to feed and care for them but he was sick and there was no work. They were not doing well and often went without food. Eva became pregnant again. She could not imagine another child to feed. So she did what she thought was best for her 5 children. She went to her mother’s house where she died a few days later. About a year later her husband died. The 5 children were split up and taken in by family members. The newspaper reported she died of a spider bit, but her family knew she had a back alley abortion. Another reason, my cousin and his wife were pregnant with their much wanted baby. The baby had anencephaly (I think that’s what it was) and after much consideration they with their Dr. decided to have an abortion. But they lived in Oklahoma. They could not get one here. So they had to fly to another state.I'm against abortion. I wish there was no need for one. But I will always be pro-choice. I wanted to respond to this post separately. You raise such a good point. When you hear about "partial birth abortion," I think most people envision some careless mom who suddenly, when she was halfway through her pregnancy that she willy nilly decided, "Oh, I think I will kill my baby because I don't want it." Most late term abortions are due to parents discovering anomalies such as anencephaly, etc. Parents who desperately love and want their baby sometimes find themselves in truly heartbreaking situations, having to make heartbreaking choices about their babies. I truly hate the way abortion is portrayed in the media. I work with families every day who lose babies, and I have met so many over the years who have been in these terrible situations. Not one person I have met and talked to and listened to their story has ever made their decision lightly. And yes, they often have to leave the care providers they trust and go to a different state. I have heard such heartbreaking stories, things most people have no idea about.
It's late, I am tired, and need to stop before I get too carried away.
|
|
rodeomom
Pearl Clutcher
Refupee # 380 "I don't have to run fast, I just have to run faster than you."
Posts: 3,675
Location: Chickasaw Nation, Oklahoma
Jun 25, 2014 23:34:38 GMT
|
Post by rodeomom on Jul 19, 2018 3:41:09 GMT
@donnie I think this is the very definition of pro-choice. You don't like abortion but your were there for and supported your daughters choice to have one. That should be a decision between her and her DR. Being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion. We just want everyone to have the right to decide what is best for them. One of the reasons I am pro-choice. In Oklahoma, 1929 during the depression (think “Grapes of wrath” ) my great Aunt Eva was 28 years old. She had 5 kids, including twin boys who had been born the year before. She was suffering from the baby blues (what we know now is postpartum depression). Her husband was doing the best he could to feed and care for them but he was sick and there was no work. They were not doing well and often went without food. Eva became pregnant again. She could not imagine another child to feed. So she did what she thought was best for her 5 children. She went to her mother’s house where she died a few days later. About a year later her husband died. The 5 children were split up and taken in by family members. The newspaper reported she died of a spider bit, but her family knew she had a back alley abortion. Another reason, my cousin and his wife were pregnant with their much wanted baby. The baby had anencephaly (I think that’s what it was) and after much consideration they with their Dr. decided to have an abortion. But they lived in Oklahoma. They could not get one here. So they had to fly to another state.I'm against abortion. I wish there was no need for one. But I will always be pro-choice. I wanted to respond to this post separately. You raise such a good point. When you hear about "partial birth abortion," I think most people envision some careless mom who suddenly, when she was halfway through her pregnancy that she willy nilly decided, "Oh, I think I will kill my baby because I don't want it." Most late term abortions are due to parents discovering anomalies such as anencephaly, etc. Parents who desperately love and want their baby sometimes find themselves in truly heartbreaking situations, having to make heartbreaking choices about their babies. I truly hate the way abortion is portrayed in the media. I work with families every day who lose babies, and I have met so many over the years who have been in these terrible situations. Not one person I have met and talked to and listened to their story has ever made their decision lightly. And yes, they often have to leave the care providers they trust and go to a different state. I have heard such heartbreaking stories, things most people have no idea about.
It's late, I am tired, and need to stop before I get too carried away.
Yes this was very devastating for my cousin and his wife. Even tho they went on the have another child, their marriage did not last. |
|
ComplicatedLady
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,083
Location: Valley of the Sun
|
Post by ComplicatedLady on Jul 19, 2018 3:47:53 GMT
But if life begins at conception, why wouldn’t this be considered an abortion?
I am definitely pro-choice having seen many people go through heartbreaking decisions.
|
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jul 19, 2018 4:20:29 GMT
But if life begins at conception, why wouldn’t this be considered an abortion? I am definitely pro-choice having seen many people go through heartbreaking decisions. Life would not continue to the point of being viable outside of the womb and the mother would probably die long before that time from a burst fallopian tube. It's an emergency condition for the mother, actually. One thing I would really like to see differentiated are pregnancies of these babies who have stopped developing or who have gross defects and those of babies developing normally. There is a difference that should be reflected in the law, especially for the later stages of pregnancy. Lumping everything into one big bag does us no good. Those who care about the rate of perfectly healthy babies being destroyed need to be recognized. Those who care about the heart-wrenching decision to end a pregnancy that's gone terribly wrong need to be recognized. It's not fair to say that either group is unfeeling or even disagrees with the other when the situations are so vastly different. People are more empathetic than are being credited by either side, but this is exactly what happens when the rhetoric gets ratcheted up. Not that rhetoric ever ratchets up in this country.  |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 14:39:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2018 4:34:00 GMT
But if life begins at conception, why wouldn’t this be considered an abortion? I am definitely pro-choice having seen many people go through heartbreaking decisions. Life would not continue to the point of being viable outside of the womb and the mother would probably die long before that time from a burst fallopian tube. It's an emergency condition for the mother, actually. One thing I would really like to see differentiated are pregnancies of these babies who have stopped developing or who have gross defects and those of babies developing normally. There is a difference that should be reflected in the law, especially for the later stages of pregnancy. Lumping everything into one big bag does us no good. Those who care about the rate of perfectly healthy babies being destroyed need to be recognized. Those who care about the heart-wrenching decision to end a pregnancy that's gone terribly wrong need to be recognized. It's not fair to say that either group is unfeeling or even disagrees with the other when the situations are so vastly different. People are more empathetic than are being credited by either side, but this is exactly what happens when the rhetoric gets ratcheted up. Not that rhetoric ever ratchets up in this country.  |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Jul 19, 2018 4:50:50 GMT
I'm TOTALLY in favor of accessible and affordable birth control. I'm a registered Republican, (even though I don't always vote Republican) so not sure why you'd think the gop is against that. They are NOT in favor of paying for abortions since a lot of us are against abortion because of our religious convictions (No, I'm not catholic). They are trying to eliminate all instruction except abstinence in the schools. The problem is it doesn't work for many. Others need to know their options to prevent pregnancy BEFORE there might be the necessity to even think/discuss abortion. They also need to know there are responsibilities on both sides before, during and after they participate in sexual activities. I have lived during the time of 'back alley procedures/butchers' and the consequences. Of course, those that had access to $$$ could have a D&C in the doctor's office/hospital, fly to the islands or even to Europe. I personally don't remember anyone cheering abortion. I do remember relief that people/families could make choices best for them. |
|
PrettyInPeank
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,691
|
Post by PrettyInPeank on Jul 19, 2018 5:09:32 GMT
I always said if I had a baby with a deformity, I'd leave it in God's hands. Even if they had no brain or only lived minutes, at least they weren't aborted.
But then I saw this video.
It absolutely gutted me. I sobbed and sobbed. And I realized no loving God would EVER want this over a painless euthanasia in utero. No God would EVER want parents to watch their baby suffer like this! Don't give me the line that "it brings them closer to God" B.S. because that's just a lie. If God is as loving as you believe and you believe he'd want this, your God is disgusting. My God cannot be loving and want this, so if this happened to me, I'd be merciful to my baby.
|
|
|
|
Post by 50offscrapper on Jul 20, 2018 0:42:27 GMT
I like reading the threads and understanding different points of view, but lately I cannot stand the immaturity of some. I think some people are here just to be ugly and divisive. They add absolutely no value to the thread. They just like to bait people. Then the name calling starts. Can we all be adults? Ignore the idiots. Block, then ignore them. Don't give them the time of day. That is how you will defeat them. Don't give in to their need for attention. This way we can all give our opinions and discuss them. Hopefully, we will learn that there is less than divides us.
|
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Jul 20, 2018 0:52:54 GMT
I like reading the threads and understanding different points of view, but lately I cannot stand the immaturity of some. I think some people are here just to be ugly and divisive. They add absolutely no value to the thread. They just like to bait people. Then the name calling starts. Can we all be adults? Ignore the idiots. Block, then ignore them. Don't give them the time of day. That is how you will defeat them. Don't give in to their need for attention. This way we can all give our opinions and discuss them. Hopefully, we will learn that there is less than divides us. I think we did pretty good last night on a very hot topic.... |
|
|
|
Post by 50offscrapper on Jul 20, 2018 1:00:17 GMT
I like reading the threads and understanding different points of view, but lately I cannot stand the immaturity of some. I think some people are here just to be ugly and divisive. They add absolutely no value to the thread. They just like to bait people. Then the name calling starts. Can we all be adults? Ignore the idiots. Block, then ignore them. Don't give them the time of day. That is how you will defeat them. Don't give in to their need for attention. This way we can all give our opinions and discuss them. Hopefully, we will learn that there is less than divides us. I think we did pretty good last night on a very hot topic.... Agreed. That is the kind of discussion I like. People trying to understand the corner cases and being respectful. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 14:39:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2018 23:48:49 GMT
Okay ReConTarians, no matter what you think of Alex Jones- watch or listen to him, hate him, meh, or don't know who he is... what do you think of censoring him or in general censoring speech you don't like?
ETA: With all due respect, this isn't a question about government censorship, so please don't correct me on the meaning of the 1st amendment.
|
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Aug 9, 2018 0:25:29 GMT
Try again, what is dangerous are the white supremacist rallies held by the right. Checking my calendar... and nope. No white supremacist rallies are scheduled in the near future. Not in the near future. Not in the distant future. And at absolutely no moment in the past. How 'bout y'all? Anyone here have any white supremacist rallies on their agenda? Well, aren’t you lucky not to live near our nation’s Capital? Bless your heart. The state of Virginia has declared a state of emergency already in order to be able to quickly mobilize resources this weekend when there will be White Supremacist rallies in Charlottesville in “honor” of the 1 year anniversary of when they murdered Heather Heyer and also in downtown DC. I’m so reassured to see peas treat the real threat of these monsters so flippantly. |
|
|
|
Post by mom on Aug 9, 2018 0:33:08 GMT
Okay ReConTarians, no matter what you think of Alex Jones- watch or listen to him, hate him, meh, or don't know who he is... what do you think of censoring him or in general censoring speech you don't like?I cannot stand him & think he is a liar a*hole. BUT I think it's a slippery slope when people start censoring others. Edited: while what they are doing is not censoring (as others have pointed out) - to answer the OP's question, I think censoring speech is a slippery slope, whenever anyone does it (Trump, included). |
|
twinsmomfla99
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,118
|
Post by twinsmomfla99 on Aug 9, 2018 0:44:11 GMT
Okay ReConTarians, no matter what you think of Alex Jones- watch or listen to him, hate him, meh, or don't know who he is... what do you think of censoring him or in general censoring speech you don't like? Private companies can censor whomever they want. Always have, always will. The First Amendment applies to GOVERNMENT action. I have not seen anything suggesting the government is censoring him. On the other hand, the Trump White House recently “censored” a journalist (forget the name but I’m sure one of the peas can provide it) when one of the CNN (I think) pool reporters was banned from press conferences because she or he asked questions that Trump didn’t like. Kellyanne or Sarah suggested this was okay (because the press is the real enemy of course). So the question back to you is: how do you feel about Trump censoring reporters and limiting their access to the Whitehouse based on their positions? |
|
|
|
Post by Skellinton on Aug 9, 2018 0:44:58 GMT
Okay ReConTarians, no matter what you think of Alex Jones- watch or listen to him, hate him, meh, or don't know who he is... what do you think of censoring him or in general censoring speech you don't like? I cannot stand him & think he is a liar a*hole. BUT I think it's a slippery slope when people start censoring others. They aren’t censoring him. Certain platforms are just not letting him utilize their services because he violated their rules, that is not censorship. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 14:39:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2018 0:51:00 GMT
I have not seen anything suggesting the government is censoring him. Including me. You haven't seen me suggest that either. |
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Aug 9, 2018 0:55:19 GMT
He’s breaking the rules of the platforms he’s using. That is not censoring him.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 14:39:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2018 0:58:22 GMT
I cannot stand him & think he is a liar a*hole. BUT I think it's a slippery slope when people start censoring others. They aren’t censoring him. Certain platforms are just not letting him utilize their services because he violated their rules, that is not censorship. I obviously don't know the full story then and missed some things. It happens.  What rules did he break? |
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
|
Post by Rainbow on Aug 9, 2018 0:59:31 GMT
pinklady , to be fair, I re-started this thread with an article specifically titled "Conservatives Must Argue About Ideas, Not Trump" because we, who have a more conservative political outlook, are so often called to defend Trump. And there you come right off the bat asking us to do that very thing. I went ahead and answered your question ultimately, but it shouldn't be surprising to feel a push-back from the others here. It will also be futile to argue about it (for everyone.) cadoodlebug , that IS great news! You know what it is? We don't want to have the topic of every discussion dictated to us by those who hate Trump. You hate Trump. Noted. Moving on, and if you can't move on from that, we will move on without you. |
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Aug 9, 2018 1:07:58 GMT
Okay ReConTarians, no matter what you think of Alex Jones- watch or listen to him, hate him, meh, or don't know who he is... what do you think of censoring him or in general censoring speech you don't like? Private companies can censor whomever they want. Always have, always will. The First Amendment applies to GOVERNMENT action. I have not seen anything suggesting the government is censoring him. On the other hand, the Trump White House recently “censored” a journalist (forget the name but I’m sure one of the peas can provide it) when one of the CNN (I think) pool reporters was banned from press conferences because she or he asked questions that Trump didn’t like. Kellyanne or Sarah suggested this was okay (because the press is the real enemy of course). So the question back to you is: how do you feel about Trump censoring reporters and limiting their access to the Whitehouse based on their positions? Yeah, the standard for free speech is different for private companies. I generally dislike censorship, but I do understand why companies do it-and it’s legal. |
|
|
|
Post by mom on Aug 9, 2018 1:19:16 GMT
I cannot stand him & think he is a liar a*hole. BUT I think it's a slippery slope when people start censoring others. They aren’t censoring him. Certain platforms are just not letting him utilize their services because he violated their rules, that is not censorship. You are right. |
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Aug 9, 2018 1:23:42 GMT
They aren’t censoring him. Certain platforms are just not letting him utilize their services because he violated their rules, that is not censorship. I obviously don't know the full story then and missed some things. It happens. What rules did he break? all of the platforms have rules against hate speech and note that repeated infractions will call for removal. Now, personally I think he's had hate speech filled bile for years and I'm not sure what the catalyst is for it happening now. |
|
|
|
Post by pierkiss on Aug 9, 2018 11:48:32 GMT
I obviously don't know the full story then and missed some things. It happens. What rules did he break? all of the platforms have rules against hate speech and note that repeated infractions will call for removal. Now, personally I think he's had hate speech filled bile for years and I'm not sure what the catalyst is for it happening now. People are threatening to (and are) boycott the platforms that are (were) allowing Jones to spew his hate speech. It comes down to a financial loss for the companies. |
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Aug 9, 2018 14:05:56 GMT
all of the platforms have rules against hate speech and note that repeated infractions will call for removal. Now, personally I think he's had hate speech filled bile for years and I'm not sure what the catalyst is for it happening now. People are threatening to (and are) boycott the platforms that are (were) allowing Jones to spew his hate speech. It comes down to a financial loss for the companies. ah, I hadn't heard of a boycott |
|
|
|
Post by katlady on Aug 9, 2018 15:16:35 GMT
I obviously don't know the full story then and missed some things. It happens. What rules did he break? all of the platforms have rules against hate speech and note that repeated infractions will call for removal. Now, personally I think he's had hate speech filled bile for years and I'm not sure what the catalyst is for it happening now. I don’t know about other platforms, but since the end of last year YouTube has been cracking down on violations of their TOS because they don’t want to lose advertising dollars. YouTube wants to be advertiser safe and friendly, I guess that means PG-13. Lol! Millions of videos have been taken down, and a lot of YouTubers are having their videos de-monetized. A lot of the flagging of inappropriate material comes from viewers. YouTubers can appeal, and many do get their videos monetized again, but I am pretty confident that Infowars won’t be back up on YouTube. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 14:39:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2018 18:44:29 GMT
I obviously don't know the full story then and missed some things. It happens. What rules did he break? all of the platforms have rules against hate speech and note that repeated infractions will call for removal. Now, personally I think he's had hate speech filled bile for years and I'm not sure what the catalyst is for it happening now. I thought he was just a mouthpiece for conspiracy theories, I was unaware of any racist issues. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 14:39:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2018 19:01:16 GMT
Twitter said they didn't ban him because he didn't violate the rules. Do they have different rules than the other platforms or did they interpret him differently?
|
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Aug 9, 2018 19:20:00 GMT
all of the platforms have rules against hate speech and note that repeated infractions will call for removal. Now, personally I think he's had hate speech filled bile for years and I'm not sure what the catalyst is for it happening now. I thought he was just a mouthpiece for conspiracy theories, I was unaware of any racist issues. He spouts anti-Muslim, anti-black, antisemitic, and/or anti-gay rhetoric daily. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 14:39:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2018 20:07:11 GMT
Twitter said they didn't ban him because he didn't violate the rules. Do they have different rules than the other platforms or did they interpret him differently? Each platform have their own T & C and have the right to interpret and enforce their own T & C's the way they want to.They are all individual corporations. Problem with Twitter is they seem to interpret their rules differently depending on which day of the week it is.They're not consistent or that pro-active in the way they enforce their T & C. |
|
What rules did he break? 
