‘The Most Dangerous Place for an African-American is in the Womb!’

[matt wade]

Again, the issue is not whether there is any truth to the abortion problem. What I've been saying, is precisely that any "group criticism" should come from within the group.

Then why do you continually criticize "the right"? You are not a part of that group, yet you criticize it.

 

[Gina B]

I agree with Eric.

There are more aborted white babies than black babies.

Here's the proof.

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss6001a1.htm?s_cid=ss6001a1_w#Tab14

Besides, if someone agrees with abortion, they usually say it's not a life. If they won't even recognize life, why on earth will they go further and categorize by race? To a pro-abortionist, that's as logical as giving them a barrel of apples and telling them to separate them into fruits and vegetables.

 

[carpro]

I don't think anyone ever set out to "refute" any "facts". That's just a straw man you keep using as a counterattack.
What most people who oppose this usually are doing is spending the time trying to explain why these numbers are high. Or now, in my case, why people react the way they do. Oh, but then that always ends up being accused by you of "blaming someone else".

Of course not. Expecially you.

I realized long ago you're not interested in factual truths, but trying to explain why everyone should overlook them.

 

[carpro]

I agree with Eric.

There are more aborted white babies than black babies.

Here's the proof.

If you deliberately ignore percentages vs. percentages, that's a convenient but fallacious argument.

 

[carpro]

Then why do you continually criticize "the right"? You are not a part of that group, yet you criticize it.

Because he's a leftist blogger pretending to be right center.

 

[Gina B]

If you deliberately ignore percentages vs. percentages, that's a convenient but fallacious argument.

I'm more of a realist. Death is death. The number of aborted white babies is higher than the number of aborted black babies. Period.

If one Hispanic person lives in a state where everyone else is white and she has an abortion, will you honestly consider it accurate to state that 100% of Hispanic babies are aborted, thus we need to focus our attention on stopping Asians from having abortions? If you would, you're wrong. We need to focus on getting HUMANS to recognize the value of life. Any humans. Any life.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

There are more aborted white babies than black babies.

Here's the proof.

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss6001a1.htm?s_cid=ss6001a1_w#Tab14

By the chart provided in your link, white babies have the lowest abortion rate by 4.2 points. Black babies are aborted at a rate more than 3X higher .

Number of abortions obtained by women in a given racial group per 1,000 women in that same group.

White babies also enjoy the lowest abortion ratio, by a full 60 points. Again, black babies are aborted at a ratio 2.8X higher than whites.

Number of abortions obtained by women in a given racial group per 1,000 live births to women in that same racial group.

These numbers do not back you up. This is a eugenics-based genocide.

 

[carpro]

By the chart provided in your link, white babies have the lowest abortion rate by 4.2 points. Black babies are aborted at a rate more than 3X higher .

Number of abortions obtained by women in a given racial group per 1,000 women in that same group.

White babies also enjoy the lowest abortion ratio, by a full 60 points. Again, black babies are aborted at a ratio 2.8X higher than whites.

Number of abortions obtained by women in a given racial group per 1,000 live births to women in that same racial group.

These numbers do not back you up. This is a eugenics-based genocide.

Democrats at work.

 

[Gina B]

I understand the concept of percentages but what's the point in it? The only purpose it seems to be serving is to turn this into a racial one and distract from the heart of the problem.

Count the bodies. They're what's real.

I'm all for stopping abortion and just as much for stopping the insane notion that we should put more energy into preventing the abortion of one race over the other.

Teach people to respect life. All people. All life. That will reach the heart of the problem...and keep hearts beating.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

The O/P tells of a person who seems to say black babies are aborted at a far greater rate, and far greater ratio than any other race, and for black babies, the womb is a far more dangerous place, by a far greater rate, and a far greater ratio, than a baby of any other race.
The chart Gina posted supports that.

 

[Eric B]

Then why do you continually criticize "the right"? You are not a part of that group, yet you criticize it.

I meant racial group.
And no; I'm not "changing up", or whatever you're likely thinking, as the context of "group" in this discussion has [almost] always been racial. You can see this in post #9 where I say "I think, until we get the remnants of this race resentment resolved, it is better not for one race to try to 'correct' another race." That's what I'm referring to.
Perhaps I should have kept specifying "race" group, then.

Nobody can help what race they are, so a race is cannot be "right or wrong" (as a whole group), while a political wing or party we all individually choose, and its positions can be right or wrong in themselves, and can rightfully be condemned by others.

Of course not. Expecially you.

I realized long ago you're not interested in factual truths, but trying to explain why everyone should overlook them.

Because you're just spitting out these figures (which are prone to skewing and differing interpretations, witness the dispute now over which group really has more abortions), and not giving us any solid point. It looks like you just want to scold the race, or use them as a poster child for the evils of the Democrats, which you don't understand will be offensive to the people, however many "facts" you may have.

Because he's a leftist blogger pretending to be right center.

I never claimed to be "right" center. Now, you're making things up. I have defaulted to the left, because am very alarmed by a lot of the rhetoric I see coming from the Right.

You on the other hand like to grille others on "who they really are", and you claim to be so "open and unashamed" about yourself, as a "right wing convervative"; (yet for one thing, you are the one choosing all the terms, for yourself and the other side!) But it looks to me like there's a bit more to your whole ideology than just that simple label. There is clearly some stuff you don't tell us, like what is the point of just hashing out negative "facts" about another race group.

What is the solution to this? To just complain about it forever? To just tongue-lash the people nonstop?

I understand the concept of percentages but what's the point in it? The only purpose it seems to be serving is to turn this into a racial one and distract from the heart of the problem.

And this is exactly why I challenge this stuff, and the question I'm trying to get out of them. Again, nobody's really even arguing over the numbers (i.e. their so-called "facts").

 

[matt wade]

I meant racial group.
And no; I'm not "changing up", or whatever you're likely thinking, as the context of "group" in this discussion has [almost] always been racial. You can see this in post #9 where I say "I think, until we get the remnants of this race resentment resolved, it is better not for one race to try to 'correct' another race." That's what I'm referring to.
Perhaps I should have kept specifying "race" group, then.

Nobody can help what race they are, so a race is cannot be "right or wrong" (as a whole group), while a political wing or party we all individually choose, and its positions can be right or wrong in themselves, and can rightfully be condemned by others.

That's some pretty good backpedaling there. Don't hurt yourself! :laugh:

 

[rbell]

Again, the issue is not whether there is any truth to the abortion problem. What I've been saying, is precisely that any "group criticism" should come from within the group.

Wow.

Can you imagine how short the Bible would be if God would wise up and listen to Eric's wisdom? How dare those stupid prophets criticize folks from other groups! How dare Jesus, Paul, Stephen be so presumptuous as to criticize "other groups..." Sheesh.


We still come back to this: Eric is more bothered by criticism of African-Americans than he is the murdering of African-American babies.

Can someone say, "Misplaced priorities?"

 

[Eric B]

That's some pretty good backpedaling there. Don't hurt yourself! :laugh:

So instead of "changing up", "backpedaling" is the retort. An instance of miscommunication, and now it can never be corrected.

I think it's simple to understand why the nature of the two groups is different.

Wow.

Can you imagine how short the Bible would be if God would wise up and listen to Eric's wisdom? How dare those stupid prophets criticize folks from other groups! How dare Jesus, Paul, Stephen be so presumptuous as to criticize "other groups..." Sheesh.

That's God-breathed scripture, which you are not! That's what you don't understand.
A large basis of racism was had been people trying to emulate the OT, and claim their group as "the chosen ones", and the others as "cursed". Then, you could even point at their demonism and other sins as "proving it". That's why this focus on all the exclusive "sins" of the black people looks suspicious. Because this was the "point" being made in the past. And while the whole issue became "hush, hush" in the later political climate, it doesn't look like the views really changed, among some.

The ultimate mistake for those trying to use scripture to justify these sentiments is that scripture would go on to teach that "all" are "under sin". Even the supposed "chosen race" kept sinning, and ultimately crucified their own Messiah.
So yes, the prophets pointed at others, but then they also pointed at their own group who kept sinning, and would eventually face national judgment. So the entire "choosing" of a physical nation basically proved the point of all of man's sin. (They're all essentially the same, even though people's particular behaviors would differ).
The New Testament would then shift the focus from "the flesh" (physical lineage) to "the Spirit" (Being "in Christ" or not). Those would be the only "groups" that mattered.

You leave off the part where Paul says "Are we better than they? No, in no wise..."(Rom.3:9)

And the ultimate irony here is that you (and conservatives in general) were the ones always complaining of "the race card" being played on you. You don't want your race criticized, or in any way addressed regarding perceived wrongs to others.
So now why can you now do it so much? It look almost like some sort of tit-for-tat "payback". You feel it was done to you, so now you're going to do it back. But that isn't right either.

We still come back to this: Eric is more bothered by criticism of African-Americans than he is the murdering of African-American babies.

Can someone say, "Misplaced priorities?"

Yes, on your part. Because people appear to only be using those babies and the race as a pawn in some game against the liberals, more than caring about the babies themselves (which as Gina said, should not matter as to which race it is). Nobody wants any such "favor".
If you have an actual, real solution to it, then that might be different.

 

[Gina B]

Wow.

Can you imagine how short the Bible would be if God would wise up and listen to Eric's wisdom? How dare those stupid prophets criticize folks from other groups! How dare Jesus, Paul, Stephen be so presumptuous as to criticize "other groups..." Sheesh.


We still come back to this: Eric is more bothered by criticism of African-Americans than he is the murdering of African-American babies.

Can someone say, "Misplaced priorities?"

I'm going to try to word this in a way that won't be non-offensive. I am not saying this of you in particular, but what I'm going to say is based on what I've experienced within conservative Christian communities in various parts of the United States and most especially in the state I am now living in.

I have African-American family members. In fact, there are a lot of different races contained within my immediate and extended family. I am a conservative Christian. This makes me a little extra observant when it comes to how races are treated by other conservative Christians.

What I have observed makes me distrustful of a large majority of conservative Christians when they become "defensive" towards any particular race. Most conservative Christians I have known are white.

Prejudice seems to be either overt or underlying in many of the conservative churches I've attended, especially prejudice against African Americans.

Therefore, seeing a sudden interest from people who are mostly white, and it is concerning African Americans, that automatically makes me suspicious of motives. When that interest and expressed concern is based on something deemed as negative actions by African Americans, it causes even more suspicions about unpure motives.

Yes, the percentages say that more blacks have abortions than whites, but the truth is that there are more deceased white babies than black babies. When murder is happening, why are you taking the time to be concerned about the percentages? This makes for triple suspicion on my part.

This is a crisis situation. Babies lives are being snuffed out. Stopping to point fingers at percentages makes no sense to me. What DOES make sense is changing hearts.

Teach people to respect life. All people. All life.

And when claiming that the focus of abortion is to help reduce the numbers of a certain race, please provide some solid proof. Abortions in the United States were once mainly reserved for those who could afford the cost of decent medical care and the principal for the fight to make it legal once again was based on women fighting the concept that their role in life was to remain at home and reproduce. This seems to directly defy the concept that the fight for women to have abortions targeted blacks if you look at the time frame and who was where and had which freedoms and voices in civil and societal rights/roles.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Therefore, seeing a sudden interest from people who are mostly white, and it is concerning African Americans, that automatically makes me suspicious of motives. When that interest and expressed concern is based on something deemed as negative actions by African Americans, it causes even more suspicions about unpure motives.

First of all, I find it suspect that you would put words in my mouth. I never blamed any African American. Talk about "unpure" motives.

My "motive" is to stop abortion. Since folks seem to not like being called "racists", and literally trip over themselves to avoid the label, and the percentages bear out the assertion referenced in the O/P, it is a perfectly good path to take, I believe. You can suspect our motives, but the numbers you yourself posted show that the most dangerous place for a black baby is INEED the womb.

Nobody can refute that. The abortion industry targets black babies in percentages, rates, & ratios up to 300% higher than other races. Case closed, I would say.

 

[carpro]

Therefore, seeing a sudden interest from people who are mostly white, and it is concerning African Americans, that automatically makes me suspicious of motives. When that interest and expressed concern is based on something deemed as negative actions by African Americans, it causes even more suspicions about unpure motives.

That's because we're all racists, doncha know? :laugh:

You and Eric keep hinting around about it , but just won't go ahead and play the liberal's favorite card...

THE RACE CARD.

Every race group can discuss demonstrated facts about racially based statistics...except white people.

 

[Eric B]

But you're not really "discussing" it. You're just throwing numbers out there, and then trying to scold the groups off of them, which are always the ones you are not apart of. All the statistics are always against them and always in favor of you! Now what does that mean? You don't quite tell us. Now when it comes back on you, as always, you accuse the other side of "playing" the "card".

 

[carpro]

All the statistics are always against them and always in favor of you! Now what does that mean? You don't quite tell us. Now when it comes back on you, as always, you accuse the other side of "playing" the "card".

It means I'm a racist, doesn't it Eric?

Go ahead and play the card. You've done everything but actually say it. Might as well be honest about it and lay it out there.

Come on! Say it!

 

[carpro]

Liberal racists bear a heavy burden for having helped destroy the black family and create a black underclass by their romanticization of ghetto behavior, and their insistence that blacks are victims who cannot be held responsible for what they do. They reject the idea that culture rather than race may help explain the disadvantages those in the black underclass face. It is true, as they point out, that some 40 percent of America’s black children are born poor, and that this fact affects their life chances. But it is also true that 85 percent of these poor children come from single-parent homes. It is this circumstance—studies show that children born into single-parent families are more likely to be poor, regardless of race, than children with two parents—rather than “institutional racism” that actually handicaps them. Yet in the liberal view, any policy aimed at countering illegitimacy and single parenthood among the black underclass is “blaming the victim.”

Play the card, Eric. You'll feel ...completed.