Would the term "Babies Rights" be more effective than the term "Pro-Life" on placards?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Harry123
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Harry123

Guest
Today, we saw anti-Trump protesters going around holding placards saying “Womens Rights”. The term “Womens Rights” on the surface sounds like a good thing. I mean, who wouldn’t want to give rights to women? However, as we know, the term “Women Rights” in large part, refers to the right for a woman to choose to have an abortion. They use the term “Womens Rights” in an attempt to give some kind of legitimacy to abortion as if it was a good thing.

So why don’t pro-life marchers use the term “Babies Rights” more? Afterall, everyone should be in favor of babies rights? I think if the term “Babies Rights” was used more, it would help make those in favor of abortion less comfortable in their position as their position effectively means they are against something which sounds good i.e. Babies Rights. No one would want to admit that they were against “Babies Rights”.

Do you think it would be more effective to use the phrase “Babies Rights” instead of “Pro-Life” on placards?
 
I don’t think so. It’s very easy to argue that babies are not being aborted, fetuses are. They’ll ignore it.

You did get the idea though…using emotions to get support. I just doubt that Babies’ Rights will do much at the start, unless it becomes so widespread that people cannot ignore it?

Pro-life does “sound” better because it insinuates that opposers are against life. And that led to them calling us anti choice :rolleyes:
 
Lea101 said:
Pro-life does “sound” better because it insinuates that opposers are against life.
Click to expand...
I don’t know. The term “Pro-Life” is kind of a meaningless term. “Pro-Life” could mean “Pro-Having A Good Time”. Have you seen that George Michael song “Wake Me Up Before You Go Go”, they are wearing t-shirts that say “Choose Life”. “Pro-Life” isn’t a very emotional message to have on placards.

http://www.tshirtlab.com.au/media/c...7a97daa66f/c/h/choose-life-george-michael.jpg

I’d feel much prouder standing behind a placard that says “Babies Rights” than one that says “Pro-Life”. And i think the opposite side, would feel more uncomfortable opposing people who are saying they are in favor of “Babies’ Rights”.

Just my personal opinion though.
 
I like it … I am for a Baby’s Rights … 👍

In this past election - I lost a friend because I could not bring myself to vote for the Democratic Platform and Hillary Clinton.

I voted for the person I believe was the only one who would nominate SCOTUS justices that would respect the lives of innocent children … even if we can only make modest changes to save lives - I am cognizant of the years of work to get the Partial Birth Abortion Ban into law and through a US Supreme Court challenge. I know it was hard fought … I remember the the President who vetoed it - twice, the Party hat fought against it and the Party that sponsored it and voted for its passage - 3 times.

And I remember the legislators who lost their seats due to their support of it, the President who signed it and the legal challenges that followed …

My words to this person were - Some day I hope we have a SCOTUS that will "uphold the rights (of the innocent unborn) to their “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” …

Thus - I am all in for Babies Rights - a Baby’s Constitutional Rights to which they are currently denied … this is a great social injustice 😦
 
I think it be more effective to do two things that inexplicably never get talked about in the “pro-life” playbook:
  1. MAKE CHILDBIRTH MORE AFFORDABLE. Why is it way more expensive to deliver a baby than to have an abortion? Nobody wants to talk about the obscenely expensive cost to choose life. Why not? Why can’t choosing a baby be as affordable as an abortion?
  2. LET PARENTS CLAIM THEIR UNBORN CHILD AS A DEPENDENT. If life begins at conception, then why doesn’t the U.S. tax code conform to that belief? You can’t claim a baby as a dependent until he or she is born. Why not? If we truly believe life begins at conception, then why aren’t the necessary tax reforms being made?
 
YADA said:
Thus - I am all in for Babies Rights - a Baby’s Constitutional Rights to which they are currently denied … this is a great social injustice 😦
Click to expand...
You do realize that there have been fewer abortions – fewer babies being killed – while Obama was president, and prior to that, fewer during Clinton’s term? If the declining abortion rates start to reverse course and there’s an INCREASE in killing babies in the next four years, your “pro-life” guy – the one who thinks Planned Parenthood does “wonderful work” – is going to have a lot of explaining to do.
 
Babies Rights may sound good on placards and signs but for many of us, being pro-life doesn’t just mean abortion. I am against abortion, capital punishment, euthanasia, and assisted suicide.
 
I’m a pro-life Atheist. I’m pro-life because I believe in concrete, factual science which states that the life of a human being begins at fertilization. As an Atheist who believes that logic and rational thought determines what’s right (religion doesn’t - there are religious people who support abortion based upon their religion, just as there are religious people who oppose it), I know that abortion is wrong. I don’t deny it’s a complicated situation. When a prenatal human being lives inside the body of a postnatal human being, that’s a unique situation. It’s not all black-and-white based upon circumstances.

But let’s remain factually honest. When it comes to abortion, there are no “babies rights” as before birth their is no “baby.” There is a zygote, embryo and fetus. All are human beings just like babies, pre-pubescents, post-pubescents, adults and geriatrics. “Babies rights” begin at birth. Prenatal rights begin before birth. Don’t make it more complicated than what it is. As the Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians (PLAGAL) states: “Human rights begin when human life begins.”
 
randomuser said:
I think it be more effective to do two things that inexplicably never get talked about in the “pro-life” playbook:
  1. MAKE CHILDBIRTH MORE AFFORDABLE. Why is it way more expensive to deliver a baby than to have an abortion? Nobody wants to talk about the obscenely expensive cost to choose life. Why not? Why can’t choosing a baby be as affordable as an abortion?
  2. LET PARENTS CLAIM THEIR UNBORN CHILD AS A DEPENDENT. If life begins at conception, then why doesn’t the U.S. tax code conform to that belief? You can’t claim a baby as a dependent until he or she is born. Why not? If we truly believe life begins at conception, then why aren’t the necessary tax reforms being made?
Click to expand...
👍
 
randomuser said:
I think it be more effective to do two things that inexplicably never get talked about in the “pro-life” playbook:
  1. MAKE CHILDBIRTH MORE AFFORDABLE. Why is it way more expensive to deliver a baby than to have an abortion? Nobody wants to talk about the obscenely expensive cost to choose life. Why not? Why can’t choosing a baby be as affordable as an abortion?
  2. LET PARENTS CLAIM THEIR UNBORN CHILD AS A DEPENDENT. If life begins at conception, then why doesn’t the U.S. tax code conform to that belief? You can’t claim a baby as a dependent until he or she is born. Why not? If we truly believe life begins at conception, then why aren’t the necessary tax reforms being made?
Click to expand...
#1. Yes, yes, yes! Why is it now so expensive? To make the rich richer. When I was born (back in the stone ages), the entire cost was $250, and that included my mother being in the hospital for five days, and my dad’s insurance paid for it. Why is it so much more now? Why in the thousands of even tens-of-thousands? I once attended a lecture by a doctor before a bunch of high school kids who was to talk about “health” and his being a doctor. He stood there, bragging about how much money he now makes and all the vacation homes he owns and how he buys a new BMW every three years and how his kids can go to whatever college they want to. My, how inspiring.

#2. Like it or not, the US Constitution recognizes personhood at birth. us pro-lifers (including an Atheist like myself) know that scientifically that there is a person before that. But that’s what our Constitution says in the 14th Amendment. There is no “person” before birth or naturalization. Of course, one of the ironic problems is that any human being living here who isn’t naturalized is a person or not.
 
randomuser said:
I think it be more effective to do two things that inexplicably never get talked about in the “pro-life” playbook:
  1. MAKE CHILDBIRTH MORE AFFORDABLE. Why is it way more expensive to deliver a baby than to have an abortion? Nobody wants to talk about the obscenely expensive cost to choose life. Why not? Why can’t choosing a baby be as affordable as an abortion?
  2. LET PARENTS CLAIM THEIR UNBORN CHILD AS A DEPENDENT. If life begins at conception, then why doesn’t the U.S. tax code conform to that belief? You can’t claim a baby as a dependent until he or she is born. Why not? If we truly believe life begins at conception, then why aren’t the necessary tax reforms being made?
Click to expand...
You type this over and over and never respond to any of the differences between a medical procedure that has few if any at all government regulation and oversight of its facilities and staff … and an industry that fight s vigorously any attempts have normal medical clinics standards imposed on it. Abortions are less expensive to provide because no one cares about whether the child lives or dies and in fact the death of the child is the main purpose - the intended out come! Abortions cost less because the doctor does not provide services to two patients for 9 months before delivery and 6 to 9 weeks post delivery, Abortions costs less because in addition to the 10 plus months of care and all the tests and procedures that occur during that time there is a hospital stay, more tests and procedures … And the liability issues are huge - the clinic and the hospital do have to meet standards, they all - every practitioner - the, clinic, hospital, lab technicians, nurses, pharmaceutical providers, pharmacists and medical equipment manufacturers all have to have liability insurance - and if the child is not perfect - everyone and anyone could become the target of a liability suit …

Are you saying that you want the same standard of medical care for a live birth that is provided for an abortion? :confused: I have asked you this many times in many threads - you never reply … If a person is in a crisis pregnancy and truly cannot afford a delivery there are resources -
You do realize that there have been fewer abortions – fewer babies being killed – while Obama was president, and prior to that, fewer during Clinton’s term? If the declining abortion rates start to reverse course and there’s an INCREASE in killing babies in the next four years, your “pro-life” guy – the one who thinks Planned Parenthood does “wonderful work” – is going to have a lot of explaining to do.
Click to expand...
You do realize that economics is never a justifiable reason to end a persons life?

Abortions have been declining for years - whether democrat or republican in White House or Congress - sometimes the rate of decline is slower … but also

True abortion rates are hard to decipher - they ways in which they gather the statistics change - some years - some states do not report at all - etc

With chemically induced abortions and over the counter access - you cannot know the true numbers …

That said - Science is on our side … it is a baby, DNA, Ultrasounds are our best friend … but then - that is why Planned Parenthood fights legislation requiring women be shown and ultrasound before an abortion is provided and also why they fought to prevent Ultrasound machines placed in Shopping Malls where women could just drop in for an Ultrasound without going to a clinic … PP does not want women to make an informed “choice”
 
I like the terms ‘pro-life’, ‘March for life’ ‘choose life’ etc.

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
Yada, you need to clam down and chill. Please.

You state that an economic situation is never justifiable to kill a human being. True. But have you talked with women facing an economic crisis made worse by a pregnancy? They will all tell, you if they could afford a child, they would have it and not an abortion. But when they can’t afford it, what’s their alternative? Uh-huh, yes, “adoption.” Somehow, they still have to pay for the prenatal care and where does that come from?

Yes, yes, yes, we all can pontificate on if she plays she pays, but that’s not reality. I had a friend who spent her life being sexually abused by her father - he said if she loved him, she’d do it. He was a Trump rich guy. And then he vvhored his daughter out to business friends to make more money. Uh-huh, like Trump. You know, the guy all you “pro-life” people voted for. Yup, that Trump. Anyway, she was taught that the only way she could get her daddy’s or any man’s love was through being a vvhore. And then she got raped by a guy. She got pregnant. She was in college, at her own expense and had no money. She scraped together a few hundred bucks for an abortion. I tried to talk her out of it but told her I would always support her. She had it done. I picked her up from the abortion business and we went to a Taco Bell. She ate her meal and her stomach grumbled. With tears in her eyes, she said: “Well, something’s still alive in me.”

You need to chill, Yada. You’re the reason why the pro-life movement can’t succeed. Keep you vitriolic religious attitudes to yourself. The pro-life movement won’t succeed so long as it promotes religion. America isn’t religious - it’s secular. Just as pro-abortion religionists (like the “Religious Coalition for Reproductive Rights”) has no place in a secular America, neither does religion-based anti-abortion groups. Keep your gods to yourself.
 
How about:

Pre-Born Lives Matter

or

Unborn Lives Matter

or

Unborn Babies’ Lives Matter

or

Pre-Born Babie’s Lives Matter

?
 
  • The prolife movement uses the term Prolife because we affirm the sacredness of life across the spectrum; unborn children, disabled children and adults, aging persons, all life.
    In states where euthenasia has been legalized, they are starting to deny payment of some kinds of treatment now, and even suggesting euthenasia as an alternative.
In the long run, a society that finds children with Down Syndrome abortable, as the norm, on a massive scale, will not be inclined to provide expensive services to those few children now born with Down Syndrome. The expectation is that the baby will be aborted. Get with the program, parent.
  • Science is on the side of prolife. We now know far more about prenatal development than in 1973. The sonogram itself is one of the most powerful instruments to help women make an informed choice. We also now are able to do some surgeries in the womb. That raises the question, how can we abort this 7 month unborn child, when we choose surgery on that other child with the same development?
  • Parents now know the sex of their unborn very early. They often are giving that child a name. A child with a name is a person.
 
I think Baby rights would me more effective as pro life seems to have lost it’s significance as the term has been used so long. Maybe a new term would help to improve the thought this is indeed a baby.

Mary.
 
If your political party is working to deprive millions of people life-saving medical insurance, you can hardly call yourself “pro-life.”
 
Book_Worm said:
If your political party is working to deprive millions of people life-saving medical insurance, you can hardly call yourself “pro-life.”
Click to expand...
I’m under Obamacare and it’s garbage. But it’s something. The Repulsivecans and the Trumpists want it gone. What are people without any type of health care suppose to do? I’m sick of the “pro-lifers” here stating how happy they were that this misogynist piece of garbage who used filthy terms to describe how he molested women will somehow “save babies.” He’s your president, not mine. I will do everything I can, even as a pro-lifer, to destroy what he attempts to do. You “pro-lifers,” you’ll never get that extra judge to overturn RvW and DvB because of how you betrayed the pro-life movement by supporting this piece of feces. Oh, did any of you look at the porno videos the First-VVhore made? You proud of that slattern? They’re all over the internet. Go take a peak. You can confess it later. I’m Atheist, pro-life and proud. Are you?
 
Culurecatholic said:
I’m under Obamacare and it’s garbage. But it’s something. The Repulsivecans and the Trumpists want it gone. What are people without any type of health care suppose to do? I’m sick of the “pro-lifers” here stating how happy they were that this misogynist piece of garbage who used filthy terms to describe how he molested women will somehow “save babies.” He’s your president, not mine. I will do everything I can, even as a pro-lifer, to destroy what he attempts to do. You “pro-lifers,” you’ll never get that extra judge to overturn RvW and DvB because of how you betrayed the pro-life movement by supporting this piece of feces. Oh, did any of you look at the porno videos the First-VVhore made? You proud of that slattern? They’re all over the internet. Go take a peak. You can confess it later. I’m Atheist, pro-life and proud. Are you?
Click to expand...
  • Obamacare is a disaster and needs to be replaced, not just repealed.
  • How is Trump a misogynist? He never said he molested women, he said women would LET him touch them. Arrogant, maybe. Hyperbolic, sure. But he never bragged about molesting women.
  • Donald Trump in fact IS your president if you legally live in one of the 50 states.
  • Trump has claimed to be pro-life for years now and his VP is pro-life. I don’t see why I shouldn’t believe that. Lifesite has already said that Trump is planning to sign an executive order to defund international planned parenthood.
  • What’s with the attack on Melania Trump? She’s not the president.
  • I’m Catholic, pro-life and proud.
  • This type of post is not deemed appropriate on this site.
 
AFerri48 said:
  • Obamacare is a disaster and needs to be replaced, not just repealed.
  • How is Trump a misogynist? He never said he molested women, he said women would LET him touch them. Arrogant, maybe. Hyperbolic, sure. But he never bragged about molesting women.
  • Donald Trump in fact IS your president if you legally live in one of the 50 states.
  • Trump has claimed to be pro-life for years now and his VP is pro-life. I don’t see why I shouldn’t believe that. Lifesite has already said that Trump is planning to sign an executive order to defund international planned parenthood.
  • What’s with the attack on Melania Trump? She’s not the president.
  • I’m Catholic, pro-life and proud.
  • This type of post is not deemed appropriate on this site.
Click to expand...
More than one woman has said that Trump molested her. Grabbing at a woman’s genitalia IS molesting her, even if she is afraid to retaliate or protest because of your wealth and power. A man who brags about doing that is unfit to be President.

And you shouldn’t believe him when he says he is pro-life because it has been proven that three-quarters of the words that come out of his mouth are lies. I’m listening to a report right now of his lies about the size of the crowds at his inauguration.

It’s just foolish to believe a man who is a proven liar.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top