What's New
Off Topix: Embrace the Unexpected in Every Discussion

Off Topix is a well established general discussion forum that originally opened to the public way back in 2009! We provide a laid back atmosphere and our members are down to earth. We have a ton of content and fresh stuff is constantly being added. We cover all sorts of topics, so there's bound to be something inside to pique your interest. We welcome anyone and everyone to register & become a member of our awesome community.

Cold blooded murder of children just became a little harder

Saw this over on Facebook and it reminds me that there are always exceptions to any rule....Now we can argue the politics of abortion the whole day long but I'd challenge anyone to walk up to any of the women mentioned above and tell them abortion is murder.

Go on, we'll wait.
This was already posted and discussed

Which is why you can't "completely" write abortion off as an evil and bad thing. My ex sister in law should have had an abortion on all 3 of her kids. She abuses them and does drugs around them. CPS has been in and out of their lives. They won't take them and put them in foster homes. They won't do jack shit. They have taken Ashley's kids once because they had Meth in their system and made me and my ex wife keep them. But then Child Services turned around and gave her kids right back to her. She beats her two sons. There's no telling what she does to her little girl. I know her boyfriend has anger issues and he beats her and he's done it in front of my kids. Which is why, since our divorce. I don't allow my kids around my ex wife's sister. I even bought 2 guns because of how screwed up she is in case she sends one of her druggy friends over to my house to threaten me.

People like her are why I'm Pro Choice.

A child being born to an abusive parent is unacceptable. Some people shouldn't breed or ever have kids. I feel like Pro Life people are under the impression that Child Protective Services is doing a wonderful job. That they're going to save those kids. They're not. They might save a few. They might take the wrong person's kids. But when you take away abortion and make people who are abusive or who suffer from drug addiction that get high, fuck, and get pregnant. Those are the people you want to get an Abortion. They'll abuse the fetus with narcotics. It'll come out with birth defects (retardation). They might even kill it after it's born being neglectful or by exposing it to drugs. If you're lucky, they might have a miscarriage. I see abortion as a mercy for children who will be born to toxic people who don't need kids. Who would hurt those kids. Should those people really be having kids in that environment? Are those toxic people suitable to be parents? Fuck no.

My mother used to be a social worker when I was a little boy. She has a few friends who still work in the profession and a lot of times they can't do anything. A mistake they make is giving the parents a chance to get their shit together because they claim they have no place to put the kids and some social workers don't like taking children home to their personal life. But will if they absolutely have no choice. My mom used to get me up at 5 in the morning to go seize people's kids. A major deterrent is when those parents become defensive and make death threats as they send a social worker "alone" to other people's houses that are abusive. So they have to come back with a police officer or a sheriff. You also have a lot of social workers who don't give a shit about their job. It's not the best system.

There's a guy on Forum Promotion that goes on and on that adoption is the best thing. No it isn't. My mother worked in that system. They can't do nothing. Child Services in Missouri is broken. It's a joke. That's why my mom quit. She wanted to make a difference and she couldn't because of how broken of a system that it is. For one, you should never hand the kids back over to their parents when you took them for the sole reason that their parents were abusive.

I didn't believe my mom at first. I thought maybe they hand them back when they make a mistake. Until they gave Ashley, my junky ex sister in law, her kids back to her. She's a meth head, who officially diagnosed mentally unstable, and doesn't need to have kids. She needs to put them up for adoption but she won't. She tortures them but believes herself to be a good mother. Her own mom has called CPS on her multiple times. My ex wife called CPS on her several times and had them do a drug test which resulted in them being taken. But NO....they give them right back to the bitch.

I can't believe Pro Lifer's want those "kinds" of people to breed and be "responsible" and have kids or call it murder. No. Let them have an abortion.

Those people are already toxic and irresponsible. It's better than them abusing the baby and victimizing it. How is that ANY better? What makes you think they can take care of a kid? One way or the other the kid is going to be a victim. Let responsible people have kids that want them.
 
Which is why you can't "completely" write abortion off as an evil and bad thing. My ex sister in law should have had an abortion on all 3 of her kids. She abuses them and does drugs around them. CPS has been in and out of their lives. They won't take them and put them in foster homes. They won't do jack shit. They have taken Ashley's kids once because they had Meth in their system and made me and my ex wife keep them. But then Child Services turned around and gave her kids right back to her. She beats her two sons. There's no telling what she does to her little girl. I know her boyfriend has anger issues and he beats her and he's done it in front of my kids. Which is why, since our divorce. I don't allow my kids around my ex wife's sister. I even bought 2 guns because of how screwed up she is in case she sends one of her druggy friends over to my house to threaten me.

People like her are why I'm Pro Choice.

A child being born to an abusive parent is unacceptable. Some people shouldn't breed or ever have kids. I feel like Pro Life people are under the impression that Child Protective Services is doing a wonderful job. That they're going to save those kids. They're not. They might save a few. They might take the wrong person's kids. But when you take away abortion and make people who are abusive or who suffer from drug addiction that get high, fuck, and get pregnant. Those are the people you want to get an Abortion. They'll abuse the fetus with narcotics. It'll come out with birth defects (retardation). They might even kill it after it's born being neglectful or by exposing it to drugs. If you're lucky, they might have a miscarriage. I see abortion as a mercy for children who will be born to toxic people who don't need kids. Who would hurt those kids. Should those people really be having kids in that environment? Are those toxic people suitable to be parents? Fuck no.

My mother used to be a social worker when I was a little boy. She has a few friends who still work in the profession and a lot of times they can't do anything. A mistake they make is giving the parents a chance to get their shit together because they claim they have no place to put the kids and some social workers don't like taking children home to their personal life. But will if they absolutely have no choice. My mom used to get me up at 5 in the morning to go seize people's kids. A major deterrent is when those parents become defensive and make death threats as they send a social worker "alone" to other people's houses that are abusive. So they have to come back with a police officer or a sheriff. You also have a lot of social workers who don't give a shit about their job. It's not the best system.

There's a guy on Forum Promotion that goes on and on that adoption is the best thing. No it isn't. My mother worked in that system. They can't do nothing. Child Services in Missouri is broken. It's a joke. That's why my mom quit. She wanted to make a difference and she couldn't because of how broken of a system that it is. For one, you should never hand the kids back over to their parents when you took them for the sole reason that their parents were abusive.

I didn't believe my mom at first. I thought maybe they hand them back when they make a mistake. Until they gave Ashley, my junky ex sister in law, her kids back to her. She's a meth head, who officially diagnosed mentally unstable, and doesn't need to have kids. She needs to put them up for adoption but she won't. She tortures them but believes herself to be a good mother. Her own mom has called CPS on her multiple times. My ex wife called CPS on her several times and had them do a drug test which resulted in them being taken. But NO....they give them right back to the bitch.

I can't believe Pro Lifer's want those "kinds" of people to breed and be "responsible" and have kids or call it murder. No. Let them have an abortion.

Those people are already toxic and irresponsible. It's better than them abusing the baby and victimizing it. How is that ANY better? What makes you think they can take care of a kid? One way or the other the kid is going to be a victim. Let responsible people have kids that want them.

As I said in the original post and many others it has a place for acts of violence and health of the mom at risk.

90-95 percent of abortions are used because people didn’t take precautions or had no self control.
 
As I said in the original post and many others it has a place for acts of violence and health of the mom at risk.

90-95 percent of abortions are used because people didn’t take precautions or had no self control.
Well yeah. We have a lot of people who are irresponsible who shouldn't be having kids and when we make them have those kids, they abuse them and it's tough getting the social services to do anything about it.
 
Not here as far as I
Well yeah. We have a lot of people who are irresponsible who shouldn't be having kids and when we make them have those kids, they abuse them and it's tough getting the social services to do anything about it.


You are predicting the future and laying down a blanket statement. With that idea we should just put every poor person and special needs person out of there misery.
 
You are predicting the future and laying down a blanket statement. With that idea we should just put every poor person and special needs person out of there misery.

I am not predicting the future. If I'm abusive to my girlfriends, always in trouble with the law, and doing drugs. Would common sense dictate that I could take care of a child?

It's pretty simple. If someone is irresponsible, doesn't pay their bills, is into drugs, breaking the law, and is violent. What makes you think they should have custody over a child let alone one of their own? I swear you make one excuse after the next to wall your Anti-Choice argument. People aren't just going to clean up their bad habits once a child comes into the fold. They often get worse.

I think you're whole Anti Choice Argument is a No True Scotsman, Appeal to Morality Fallacy, and Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam. You think it's just irresponsible women. You don't add in all of the reasons that Webster posted. Some women need to have it done for medical reasons. And while I have given my views on the subject, it doesn't make them no more fallacious than yours is.
 
I am not predicting the future. If I'm abusive to my girlfriends, always in trouble with the law, and doing drugs. Would common sense dictate that I could take care of kids let alone having them?

Yes you are you said If they did not want the child at that moment it will be become a abusive family. That’s predicting the future. I’ve known families that made irresponsible people into responsible people.
 
You are predicting the future and laying down a blanket statement.
You deal with cases as they come up, not as you would want to with a blanket, all-encompassing rule.
 
Yes you are you said If they did not want the child at that moment it will be become a abusive family. That’s predicting the future. I’ve known families that made irresponsible people into responsible people.

No, I'm using common sense & you're doing a "No True Scotsman". I've pointed that out many times already.
 
No, I'm using common sense & you're doing a "No True Scotsman". I've pointed that out many times already.
And where is the common sense? You said children not wanted will be abused. So you must be for eliminating the poor and special needs people. I don’t understand how you can be for elimination of one type of innocent human but not others that are innocent also.
 
Ok, you say common sense I say blanket statement.

lol. Would you let your kids stay with a convicted pedophile?

If the answer is no. We would call that common sense. And if you did knowing they were guilty of it, you have no common sense. But I guess you can use your "Blanket Statement of The Gaps" argument on that idea too.

And where is the common sense? You said children not wanted will be abused. So you must be for eliminating the poor and special needs people. I don’t understand how you can be for elimination of one type of innocent human but not others that are innocent also.

Did I say "ALL" children? Did I say EVERYONE? Where in that sentence is a No True Scotsman claim being inferred?
 
lol. Would you let your kids stay with a convicted pedophile?

If the answer is no. We would call that common sense. And if you did knowing they were guilty of it, you have no common sense. But I guess you can use your "Blanket Statement of The Gaps" argument on that idea too.

Quote: I have no idea on what this has to do with unwanted children being born are going to be abused so it’s better to abort them. Again it must mean you are for elimination of the poor and unwanted that are born.




Did I say "ALL" children? Did I say EVERYONE? Where in that sentence is a No True Scotsman claim being inferred?

Yes, yes you implied just that in that very sentence. I don’t know about this true Scotsman but I could use one of their beers.
 
Quote: I have no idea on what this has to do with unwanted children being born are going to be abused so it’s better to abort them. Again it must mean you are for elimination of the poor and unwanted that are born.

No. I asked you if I said All or everyone and now you're inserting that into my argument.

A No True Scotsman is implied when someone uses the following "All" or "Everyone" to boast their argument. I am doing no such thing. But I could accuse you of moving the goal posts and twisting my words. I never stated ALL unwanted children. That is a case of you forming a postulate and "claiming" I said those things. Pro Choice does not mean I am in favor of euthanizing every unborn child out there in the world.
 
A No True Scotsman is implied when someone uses the following "All" or "Everyone" to boast their argument. I am doing no such thing. But I could accuse you of moving the goal posts and twisting my words. I never stated ALL unwanted children. That is a case of you forming a postulate and "claiming" I said those things. Pro Choice does not mean I am in favor of euthanizing every unborn child out there in the world.
This is implied any way you cut it that we can’t have unwanted children being born.

Quote: and when we make them have those kids, they abuse them and it's tough getting the social services to do anything about it.
 
This is implied any way you cut it that we can’t have unwanted children being born.

Quote: and when we make them have those kids, they abuse them and it's tough getting the social services to do anything about it.

Knock it off with the Tu quoque fallacy. You're just using sophistry to derail the debate.
 
Remind us again which party is the "Party of Life"....


"....but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea." - Matt. 18:6, ESV
 
Remind us again which party is the "Party of Life"....


"....but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea." - Matt. 18:6, ESV


And another blanket statement in this thread. You are taking the words from this man and saying all political conservatives and republicans want this.

This thread should be re-named the blanket statement thread.

All unwanted children will be abused and every Republican and conservative want rape victims to be forced to go through the pregnancy.
 
Back
Top Bottom