SB: Masochism for Beginners a.k.a The Abortion Thread v5.2

[Mr. P]

One last thing, since I found my support for typing my original comment on this particular matter:

[quote="Mr. P.]What you also fail to accept is that Pro-Choice is NOT pro-abortion. You said earlier you would prefer to couch the discussion as Anti-Abortion and Pro-Abortion. To me that is more polemical than Pro-Choice. And this is because as someone who is Pro-Choice, I am leaveing that choice for people like you to NOT have abortions.

Do you even read what I type? Really, I have to wonder.

Here is what you typed:

Well personally I tended to use the terms pro-abortion and anti-abortion simply because pro-legalised abortion and anti-legalised-abortion don't exactly slip off the tongue, however I've given up on that because you end upsetting pro-choice types who insist that the term doesn't adequately reflect that they aren't pro-abortion but pro-having-the-option-of-having-abortions. Now I just use pro-choice when describing pro-abortion positions and pro-life when describing all things anti-abortion.

[/quote]

Do YOU even read what you type? But, of course, it will turn out to be ME that missed something...me that got it all wrong. Right Niall?

Mr. P.

[indie]

...SO please...go screw yourself. And if you got something to say, say it to me.

Oh...and just where was I offensive?...

Fine.

• 1. You hijacked a topic onto a totally irrelevant issue.
  2. You ignored two requests to go start your own topic about that issue.
  3. You post 2, 3, 4 times in a row, until you manage to goad someone into responding.
  4. You attack the wording of a post rather than the meaning, senseless nitpicking when the meaning is rather obvious.
  5. You attack the man not the issue. Whining about the title of the topic rather than addressing the content. Whining about a single "fuck" used for emphasis, (and then tell me to screw myself.)

What were you trying to prove?

You seem to be the one trying to prove something. What, I really can't fathom. It isn't like this is a winnable argument.

[Mr. P]

1. You hijacked a topic onto a totally irrelevant issue.

I...I...hijacked a topic? Mad posted about the abortion issue and I responded by saying I did not think it was correct. It could have ended there...Mad then responded...and we were off. Why is it just me that gets the blame?

2. You ignored two requests to go start your own topic about that issue.

I do NOT see any direct request for ME to start another topic. Do you? Anyone else could have also started another topic at those points...but it is ME, and me alone, that gets the tag of the donkey, huh?

3. You post 2, 3, 4 times in a row, until you manage to goad someone into responding.

I respond as I do to keep each topic as isolated as possible and when there are separate posters. Also, I usually need to post between other activities and always by default hit new posts. I was not goading by posting. Keep trying. Lastly, I have done this forever at booktalk because I hate loooong single posts. Everyone who has BEEN here knows this about me.

4. You attack the wording of a post rather than the meaning, senseless nitpicking when the meaning is rather obvious.

We have always had lengthy discussions of semantics here within topics. I am not the only one who does this.

5. You attack the man not the issue.

Any instances? I tried hard throughout not to attack Niall maliciously.

Whining about the title of the topic rather than addressing the content. Whining about a single "fuck" used for emphasis, (and then tell me to screw myself.)

The point of that was because this all started off about polemicizing the issue using specific words!!! Do you not see the irony in that? Anyway, to have a topic subject like that for what I, at least, consider a serious discussion is bad form.

I told you to screw yourself because you bowed out of the discussion and then came back only to show me up and insult me. As I said, I have put alot into this community. I support it and Chris and I have been a regular and quality contributor here for over 3 years. You stepped over the line by inserting nothing but an attack on me when I do not think I deserved it.

What were you trying to prove?

You seem to be the one trying to prove something. What, I really can't fathom. It isn't like this is a winnable argument.

So there is no hope of ever resolving this issue, in your opinion. So what do we do, ignore it and let it fester? I am trying to prove that my, and others, POV is valid and that we are not "Pro-Abortion" as Niall DID indeed suggest.


Speak to me directly from now on if you can. No slap in the face posts to others with a message intended for me, huh? Show some spine. At least everyone else, whether we lock horns or not, has always treated me with respect outside of a heated discussion. Whaddaya think?

Mr. P.

[indie]

I am trying to prove that my, and others, POV is valid and that we are not "Pro-Abortion" as Niall DID indeed suggest.

All else aside, that is your mistake. You, or I, or Niall001 or anyone else cannot prove our points of view to be valid. The simply are valid as such, and by sharing them are subject to other's scrutiny, but it is up to them to decide if it's the right point of view for them, or if they think it's wrong. You aren't going to convince Niall001 of anything, any more than he could convince you that his position is correct. And I think that is what this boils down to, not the validity of the argument, but who is right.

Speak to me directly from now on if you can. No slap in the face posts to others with a message intended for me, huh? Show some spine. At least everyone else, whether we lock horns or not, has always treated me with respect outside of a heated discussion. Whaddaya think?

I think your arrogance matches your postcount, and neither does anything for me.

[Mr. P]

I am trying to prove that my, and others, POV is valid and that we are not "Pro-Abortion" as Niall DID indeed suggest.

All else aside, that is your mistake. You, or I, or Niall001 or anyone else cannot prove our points of view to be valid. The simply are valid as such, and by sharing them are subject to other's scrutiny, but it is up to them to decide if it's the right point of view for them, or if they think it's wrong. You aren't going to convince Niall001 of anything, any more than he could convince you that his position is correct. And I think that is what this boils down to, not the validity of the argument, but who is right.

Speak to me directly from now on if you can. No slap in the face posts to others with a message intended for me, huh? Show some spine. At least everyone else, whether we lock horns or not, has always treated me with respect outside of a heated discussion. Whaddaya think?

I think your arrogance matches your postcount, and neither does anything for me.

I am not only talking post count, btw. But then if you understood what I said, you could'nt have made that arrogant statement now could you?

I may be very direct and heated in my discussion, but I did nothing to derserve your personal attacks. Thats the bottom line, pot....kettle out!

Mr. P.

[Mr. P]

I am sorry for posting again after my last post. I know this is a sign of arrogance and all, but I sometimes think of things after the fact...ever happen to any of you? Anyway...

I see my rebuttal of your original "5 sins of the Mr. P." was successful (no response was even really possible now was it?) It was really a poor attmept and showed little research into the discussion off of which you were basing them!! (See, THAT was a goad. I am famous for using a tactic I am accused of for effect after it is shown to be baseless).

You aren't going to convince Niall001 of anything, any more than he could convince you that his position is correct. And I think that is what this boils down to, not the validity of the argument, but who is right.

The thing of it is, I DO think that Niall's position is correct...for him. And this is why I feel MY position is the best for all. It leaves the choice for anyone to be comfortable in their position. I am no trying to promote death, just choice. But when someon tells me they want to pass laws barring my choice or anyones choice in this matter specifically, I bristle. I am a more agressive person, some people dont like that, and I dont really care. People who do not pass snap judgements know me to be a very good a caring person.

I think your arrogance matches your postcount, and neither does anything for me.

Just keep in mind that I am not out to please you in any way. Nor will I sugar coat my positions and the manner in which I discuss them. Who is the one name calling and attacking here most? I think it is not me my friend.

I am so glad that, despite my heated discussion, I am coming out on top here. (AOOOP! See, and there was the Arrogance!) lol

Mr. P.

[indie]

Wow... just wow.

I'm done here, are you? (purely rhetorical question.)

[Mr. P]

Wow... just wow.

I'm done here, are you? (purely rhetorical question.)

I was done. You said you were done way back when and then chose launch a personal attack. Just admit it and realize that you may just have flamed the issue up.

Mr. P.

[Chris OConnor]

This discussion reminds me of a topic I created on a different message board years ago. I titled the topic, "101 Irrational Beliefs," and then I proceeded to list everything from astral projection to the God belief. Well, this discussion became so heated and lasted so long that it set records on that particular message board. We had over 5000 posts in one thread.

In an effort to bring the discussion back on track I created a new thread titled, "Please Pass The Fire Extinguisher," as a way of acknowledging that the upcoming discussion was going to be hot - heated enough to need a fire extinguisher. And it was with a total of over 3000 posts once again. I think Niall was making a light-hearted statement with his prediction that the thread he was creating was bound to be heated and visitors would have to be masochistic to join it. Then again I did not read the first thread so there could be something else going on here.

Nick is right that we need all the discussion we can get right now. The forums have been slow so even disputes and differences of opinion need to be allowed to run in whatever direction they may. Quality over quantity when quantity is sufficient. But beggars can't be choosers and right now we need discussions that fuel the fire. Nick, you're hired for that.

PS Does anyone know a good attorney in Florida? I was hit from behind by an underage drunk driver Monday night and am dealing with some severe pain. My car was completely destroyed. And this little monster of a teenager had no remorse and was "combatant" with Florida Highway Patrol and all of the doctors and nurses at the hospital. My back, neck and arm are screwed now.

Nick, I see you posted pics in the new album section of the site. We should all try to encourage everyone to do the same so that that section grows. I will add some photos myself soon.

[NaddiaAoC]

Chris,

I couldn't help but think of that old fire extinguisher thread when reading through this thread as well. I especially think of it when I read statements like this from Indie:

All else aside, that is your mistake. You, or I, or Niall001 or anyone else cannot prove our points of view to be valid. The simply are valid as such, and by sharing them are subject to other's scrutiny, but it is up to them to decide if it's the right point of view for them, or if they think it's wrong. You aren't going to convince Niall001 of anything, any more than he could convince you that his position is correct. And I think that is what this boils down to, not the validity of the argument, but who is right.

How does Indie know that Nick won't convince Niall of anything or that Niall won't convince Nick of anything? Abortion may be an old argument, but people's views do change. I argued mercilessly with you over this subject, and my views changed drastically as a result of those heated debates. Exchanging ideas may not change anyone's point of view, but it may. And even if views don't change, we may at least come to understand where others are coming from a little better by considering their point of view.

I haven't followed other abortion threads on BookTalk to know what arguments have been made. Niall, you challenged Nick stating that he does not understand your views. I'm curious, what is your point of view? You come across to me as a prolifer. What's your position on abortion, legally and morally? What are your reasons for your position? You state that the important criteria when discussing abortion is the point at which the taking of human life should be illegal. Is that correct? Why is the mere existence of human life in the embryonic state more important than a woman's right to make choices for her own body and future? If you are "pro-life," do you make any exceptions for abortion, I.E. rape, risks to the woman's health or life, etc?

Cheryl