PDA

View Full Version : Mind = Blown from those who are anything but pro-choice.



Pages : [1] 2

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 02:41 PM
Giving birth is a parental decision, first and foremost. Especially at early stages, it's just a part of the woman's body.

blip63
08-27-2011, 02:49 PM
The woman's body argument is retarded. Until you have more than just a lump of cells sitting around inside a woman feel free to abort it, cook it, or throw it at your neighbors window. After 21 weeks(pretty sure this is the cutoff) that pos is supposed to feel pain, and at that point I'd restrict abortion to cases where the mothers life is in danger.

GoJu
08-27-2011, 02:55 PM
I support abortion up to the point where the fetus develops a brain, before it technically still is part of her body, but after that it is another human being in a symbiotic relationship with the mother. I do think it is immoral to kill it at that point.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 02:56 PM
The woman's body argument is retarded. Until you have more than just a lump of cells sitting around inside a woman feel free to abort it, cook it, or throw it at your neighbors window. After 21 weeks(pretty sure this is the cutoff) that pos is supposed to feel pain, and at that point I'd restrict abortion to cases where the mothers life is in danger.

It shouldn't take 5 months to decide to abort anyway. Either way, if the parents realize they are not ready or if there are unforseen circumstances, they should be able to abort even after 21 weeks. I'm all for finding a way to abort in the most humane (sounds ironic but you get it) ways possible though.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 04:48 PM
Giving birth is a parental decision, first and foremost. Especially at early stages, it's just a part of the woman's body.

People who are anti-choice don't care about the babies. Argue with any anti-choicer and you will eventually hear this giveaway: "Well, she should have thought about that before she had sex!"

People who oppose abortion are liars. They are not worried about the sanctity of life. They believe that since a woman had sex that they didn't preapprove, that woman has lost her right to own her body and she must be punished with pregnancy, childbirth and parenthood. The fact that women get sick and/or die during these stages all the goddamn time is a feature to them, not a glitch.

/thread

semitope
08-27-2011, 04:57 PM
Giving birth is a parental decision, first and foremost. Especially at early stages, it's just a part of the woman's body.

atheism in action? or is it evolution in action? Still can't understand how people can know something will be a human and then kill it thinking it is anything but murder to do so. Parental decisions come before getting pregnant.

StylesOfBeyond
08-27-2011, 05:05 PM
atheism in action? or is it evolution in action? Still can't understand how people can know something will be a human and then kill it thinking it is anything but murder to do so. Parental decisions come before getting pregnant.

Question; you ever jerk off?

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 05:13 PM
atheism in action? or is it evolution in action? Still can't understand how people can know something will be a human and then kill it thinking it is anything but murder to do so. Parental decisions come before getting pregnant.

Why are you bringing atheism or evolution in this thread? Why should a "will be human" hold any value, when the only persons responsible for giving birth are the parents?

Murder: 1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

Murder is relative. Cry me a river.

semitope
08-27-2011, 05:17 PM
Why are you bringing atheism or evolution in this thread? Why should a "will be human" hold any value, when the only persons responsible for giving birth are the parents?

Murder: 1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

Murder is relative. Cry me a river.

The things that cheapen human life? Just seemed natural to bring them in. Killing someone at any stage in their life is usually a bad thing. Not now though; the embryo/foetus can't defend itself so we choose for it.

flairon
08-27-2011, 05:18 PM
atheism in action? or is it evolution in action? Still can't understand how people can know something will be a human and then kill it thinking it is anything but murder to do so. Parental decisions come before getting pregnant.

there ya go...will be. Not is. If you are so against abortion, then start adopting every fetus that would be aborted. You or anyone else has no right to tell anyone that they must carry a child full term or raise a child because it doesnt conform to your morality.

MyLastSerenade
08-27-2011, 05:21 PM
1) man kills pregnant woman, killing baby. man gets life for double murder.
http://mikuchan.org/utau/src/128428592665.jpg



2) woman gets abortion, Dr. kills baby...
http://s3.amazonaws.com/kym-assets/entries/icons/original/000/001/253/everything_went_better_than_expected.jpg?125751095 9



http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_N9MwoZnSuYs/TJA_GpA2lzI/AAAAAAAAAEM/JYaJLXuck7c/s1600/i-dunno-lol.jpg

semitope
08-27-2011, 05:25 PM
there ya go...will be. Not is. If you are so against abortion, then start adopting every fetus that would be aborted. You or anyone else has no right to tell anyone that they must carry a child full term or raise a child because it doesnt conform to your morality.

my morality? You don't seem to understand I am saying it is murder. Why people seem to think they can pick and choose is beyond me. Who gives you the right to choose when someone is entitled to life? If you don't want a baby, don't get pregnant. Why license a mother to kill just because she messed up?

flairon
08-27-2011, 05:30 PM
my morality? You don't seem to understand I am saying it is murder. Why people seem to think they can pick and choose is beyond me. If you don't want a baby, don't get pregnant. Why license a mother to kill just because she messed up?

so you would rather the messed up mother have a child that she can't afford, will likely not take care of correctly, cant feed, can't/wont take to the doctor until it ends up a child that joins the long list of kids who are abused, in the foster care system or like in the casey anthony case?

Hey that's a good plan. Lets go with that one. Good thing it wasn't 'murdered' while it was still a mass of cells so that it humanely got to live those 3-4 years with daily beatings, broken bones, concussions until its bones were finally found ductaped in a ditch.

tk217
08-27-2011, 05:31 PM
Giving birth is a parental decision, first and foremost. Especially at early stages, it's just a part of the woman's body.

brb killing a child when I can give it up for adoption instead to a loving family.

brb not using birth control, condoms, morning after pill, dental dam, spermicide, countless other methods.

brb "rationalizing" life starts at some particular moment in time rather than at conception despite scientific empirical evidence.

Although I may accept that abortion occurs. I believe through education people can see the error in their ways and that there are FAR more options out there outside of killing a defenseless human.

And a plethora of other means and ways to prevent the development of another life from existing prior to the need/desire to abort a human.

semitope
08-27-2011, 05:37 PM
so you would rather the messed up mother have a child that she can't afford, will likely not take care of correctly, cant feed, can't/wont take to the doctor until it ends up a child that joins the long list of kids who are abused, in the foster care system or like in the casey anthony case?

Hey that's a good plan. Lets go with that one. Good thing it wasn't 'murdered' while it was still a mass of cells so that it humanely got to live those 3-4 years with daily beatings, broken bones, concussions until its bones were finally found ductaped in a ditch.

You heard about the stories of parents killing children just because they are having difficulty? Would you approve of that? DO you think its your choice to kill that defenceless person when they are weakest?

Ideally I think the child should be taken care of by the state or someone else, but deciding to kill just because you messed up is not right.

flairon
08-27-2011, 05:38 PM
a fetus is not a child
'life' and sentient existence isnt the same thing

if you think a dental dam is going to stop pregnancy, you're doing something wrong

tk217
08-27-2011, 05:39 PM
You heard about the stories of parents killing children just because they are having difficulty? Would you approve of that? DO you think its your choice to kill that defenceless person when they are weakest?

Ideally I think the child should be taken care of by the state or someone else, but deciding to kill just because you messed up is not right.

So are you arguing for the sanctity of life or are you arguing for control?

What is your opinion on the death penalty?

tk217
08-27-2011, 05:39 PM
a fetus is not a child
'life' and sentient existence isnt the same thing

if you think a dental dam is going to stop pregnancy, you're doing something wrong

Oh I see, rationalizing again. Conception is when LIFE (meaning a new organism) begins.

Go ask your local university biologist.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 05:39 PM
my morality? You don't seem to understand I am saying it is murder. Why people seem to think they can pick and choose is beyond me. Who gives you the right to choose when someone is entitled to life? If you don't want a baby, don't get pregnant. Why license a mother to kill just because she messed up?

Do I need to copy paste the definition another time or are you just gonna fake not seeing it.

Murder: 1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

Yes, it is YOUR morality. Why should a potential life hold any value? Lol'd at what "gives you the right" to give birth, maybe because it's your choice, her body, your phucking sperm and your responsibility.


brb killing a child when I can give it up for adoption instead to a loving family.

brb not using birth control, condoms, morning after pill, dental dam, spermicide, countless other methods.

brb "rationalizing" life starts at some particular moment in time rather than at conception despite scientific empirical evidence.

Although I may accept that abortion occurs. I believe through education people can see the error in their ways and that there are FAR more options out there outside of killing a defenseless human.

And a plethora of other means and ways to prevent the development of another life from existing prior to the need/desire to abort a human.

brb messed up childhood far away from biological parents

brb humans make mistakes

brb a week old baby is the same as a newborn baby.

brb who cares?

tk217
08-27-2011, 05:41 PM
Do I need to copy paste the definition another time or are you just gonna fake not seeing it.

Murder: 1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

Yes, it is YOUR morality. Why should a potential life hold any value? Lol'd at what "gives you the right" to give birth, maybe because it's your choice, her body, your phucking sperm and your responsibility.



brb messed up childhood far away from biological parents

brb humans make mistakes

brb a week old baby is the same as a newborn baby.

brb who cares?

LOL.

Claiming that a person who isn't with their biological parents makes them messed up -- over the alternative -- DEAD.

You're arguing social/political and economic factors rather than intrinsic scientific realities.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 05:43 PM
Oh I see, rationalizing again. Conception is when LIFE (meaning a new organism) begins.

Go ask your local university biologist.

again life is not the same as sentient existence, he's not rationalizing, he's merely pointing out facts.

flairon
08-27-2011, 05:43 PM
You heard about the stories of parents killing children just because they are having difficulty? Would you approve of that? DO you think its your choice to kill that defenceless person when they are weakest?

Ideally I think the child should be taken care of by the state or someone else, but deciding to kill just because you messed up is not right.

First off..its not a child. At most its a fetus...generally in the time frame of most abortions it's mass of cells, nothing more. Apparently you would approve of parents killing children when they are having difficulty. Have you ever been to an abortion clinic? I have, I used to work as an escort at one. Generally the women coming in there aren't making that choice on the spur of the moment. They dont have the money, the life, the mental ability..etc..etc. to bring a child into the world and forcing them to have that child would put that child into a life of something far worse than death. And when it comes right down to it, nature takes care of it because a woman can only have so many abortions before sooner or later scar tissue builds up in the uterus and they can no longer get pregnant.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 05:44 PM
LOL.

Claiming that a person who isn't with their biological parents makes them messed up -- over the alternative -- DEAD.

You're arguing social/political and economic factors rather than intrinsic scientific realities.

**over the alternative -- was never born and was never conscious of what he could've been, yeah right. Who cares about scientific realities lol? How is that relevant?

flairon
08-27-2011, 05:45 PM
Oh I see, rationalizing again. Conception is when LIFE (meaning a new organism) begins.

Go ask your local university biologist.

then you better stop eating..even plants..because by that definition, you're extinguishing life. stepped on a bug today? KILLER!!, mowed the grass? MASS MURDERER!!!!

tk217
08-27-2011, 05:46 PM
again life is not the same as sentient existence, he's not rationalizing, he's merely pointing out facts.

I believe in the sanctity of life. He is rationalizing. You are killing something that is alive when you abort a fetus. Proclaiming that it somehow has no thoughts, feelings, or whatever else you want to claim as a sentient being is silly.

You're rationalizing, much like rather than realizing a leather jacket is some animals skin or that delicious turkey sandwich use to be alive -- you don't focus on it.

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 05:46 PM
I am personally against abortion. Even from a non-religious standpoint, I find it brutal. Killing the most intimate part of yourself and the weakest life-force of your own species is savage. With that being said, I recognize the grey area in the medical field in regards to what constitutes "human life" and when that date should be set. For that reason, I would opt for a 2 month window for abortion before any nervous system develops (whether it is functional or not), the obvious exception being the mother's health.

I also cannot stand when people say "would you rather a f*cked up single mom raise the kid" or "don't you care about how much money it would cost the nation!!!!!!111111?!?" Give the choice to your offspring. I have had friends that grew up in group homes, and they enjoy their life. At least give them the chance. Wash your hands of your responsibility and give it up for adoption (which is responsible in many cases). In regards to the cost of the state to raise these children, work it out. Allocate money for the weakest and most vulnerable members of society.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 05:48 PM
I believe in the sanctity of life. He is rationalizing. You are killing something that is alive when you abort a fetus. Proclaiming that it somehow has no thoughts, feelings, or whatever else you want to claim as a sentient being is silly.

You're rationalizing, much like rather than realizing a leather jacket is some animals skin or that delicious turkey sandwich use to be alive -- you don't focus on it.

No, I just have a greater sensitivity/empathy towards two fully grown adults than a bunch of cells. Btw, I hope you're vegan. I don't focus on my turkey sandwich because I don't care.

tk217
08-27-2011, 05:49 PM
then you better stop eating..even plants..because by that definition, you're extinguishing life. stepped on a bug today? KILLER!!, mowed the grass? MASS MURDERER!!!!

I don't really care about plant life or other animal life to the extent I care about human life. I know. I'm selfish. Though, I do think torturing animal life is wrong and allowing plant life that is damaging to the environment or introducing foreign species that end up decimating currently existing life is probably not a good idea.

There are examples of this and what it does.

I realize you now think gassing people is okay and ethnic cleansing must be okay. Real mass murder. Through your facetious comments. :)

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 05:49 PM
I am personally against abortion. Even from a non-religious standpoint, I find it brutal. Killing the most intimate part of yourself and the weakest life-force of your own species is savage. With that being said, I recognize the grey area in the medical field in regards to what constitutes "human life" and when that date should be set. For that reason, I would opt for a 2 month window for abortion before any nervous system develops (whether it is functional or not).

I also cannot stand when people say "would you rather a f*cked up single mom raise the kid" or "don't you care about how much money it would cost the nation!!!!!!111111?!?" Give the choice to your offspring. I have had friends that grew up in group homes, and they enjoy their life. At least give them the chance. Wash your hands of your responsibility and give it up for adoption (which is responsible in many cases). In regards to the cost of the state to raise these children, work it out. Allocate money for the weakest and most vulnerable members of society.

You just said it. INTIMATE part of YOURSELF, therefore, YOUR choice.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 05:49 PM
1) man kills pregnant woman, killing baby. man gets life for double murder.
http://mikuchan.org/utau/src/128428592665.jpg



2) woman gets abortion, Dr. kills baby...
http://s3.amazonaws.com/kym-assets/entries/icons/original/000/001/253/everything_went_better_than_expected.jpg?125751095 9



http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_N9MwoZnSuYs/TJA_GpA2lzI/AAAAAAAAAEM/JYaJLXuck7c/s1600/i-dunno-lol.jpg

In case you're genuinely curious...

Situation 1: I throw away a piece of furniture that I don't want. everythingwentbetterthanexpected

Situation 2: Someone breaks into my house in the middle of the night, beats me with a baseball bat and steals my furniture. fuuuuuuuuu

Get it now? Voluntary vs. involuntary?

semitope
08-27-2011, 05:49 PM
So are you arguing for the sanctity of life or are you arguing for control?

What is your opinion on the death penalty?

death penalty is not necessary unless you are trying to save on prison expenses. It would be wrong in that case though. You can lock someone up because they are a danger, you can even make use of them in prison in ways that aid the society.

Control and "sanctity of life" I guess. Once there is an embryo, you done goofed. The essentials of a person have been formed


In case you're genuinely curious...

Situation 1: I throw away a piece of furniture that I don't want. everythingwentbetterthanexpected

Situation 2: Someone breaks into my house in the middle of the night, beats me with a baseball bat and steals my furniture. fuuuuuuuuu

Get it now? Voluntary vs. involuntary?

Furniture is not a person. Voluntary on the mothers part, but its not her choice once she is carrying another life

tk217
08-27-2011, 05:49 PM
No, I just have a greater sensitivity/empathy towards two fully grown adults than a bunch of cells. Btw, I hope you're vegan. I don't focus on my turkey sandwich because I don't care.

What is your opinion on the death penalty then? I would love to hear this one -- I am more sympathetic to those who can think and are adults -- then those who are absolutely defenseless.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 05:50 PM
I don't really care about plant life or other animal life to the extent I care about human life. I know. I'm selfish. Though, I do think torturing animal life is wrong and allowing plant life that is damaging to the environment or introducing foreign species that end up decimating currently existing life is probably not a good idea.

There are examples of this and what it does.

I realize you now think gassing people is okay and ethnic cleansing must be okay. Real mass murder. Through your facetious comments. :)

Hello hypocrisy.

You draw the line at human life, I draw the line at born baby, herp derp.

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 05:51 PM
so you would rather the messed up mother have a child that she can't afford, will likely not take care of correctly, cant feed, can't/wont take to the doctor until it ends up a child that joins the long list of kids who are abused, in the foster care system or like in the casey anthony case?

Hey that's a good plan. Lets go with that one. Good thing it wasn't 'murdered' while it was still a mass of cells so that it humanely got to live those 3-4 years with daily beatings, broken bones, concussions until its bones were finally found ductaped in a ditch. Yeah because Casey Anthony killed her daughter because abortion was illegal...:rolleyes:. Or maybe she killed her daughter because she was a narcissistic sociopath.....hmmmm.....

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 05:52 PM
What is your opinion on the death penalty then? I would love to hear this one -- I am more sympathetic to those who can think and are adults -- then those who are absolutely defenseless.

I am against death penalty. How is that relevant?

tk217
08-27-2011, 05:53 PM
Hello hypocrisy.

You draw the line at human life, I draw the line at born baby, herp derp.

I have to eat something, bud. If I could not damage anything I would choose that. :)

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 05:53 PM
You just said it. INTIMATE part of YOURSELF, therefore, YOUR choice.My two and a half year old daughter is an intimate part of myself too.....

tk217
08-27-2011, 05:54 PM
I am against death penalty. How is that relevant?

It is relevant when looking at your beliefs. Why are you against the death penalty but okay with abortion?

One voluntary did something so heinous to damage society in such a way as taking someones life (what the DP is for). These people harmed others. What did the fetus/baby/zygote do?

flairon
08-27-2011, 05:55 PM
Yeah because Casey Anthony killed her daughter because abortion was illegal...:rolleyes:. Or maybe she killed her daughter because she was a narcissistic sociopath.....hmmmm.....

yep..someone that didnt want the baby because it wasn't convenient to her lifestyle. see the connection yet? The only difference between her and the 'mothers' that keep their kids and take out their regrets on a daily basis on the child in the form of violence is that she just had the lack of conscious that allowed her to just cut straight to the chase and end that kid's life instead of dragging it on for years.

tk217
08-27-2011, 05:57 PM
yep..someone that didnt want the baby because it wasn't convenient to her lifestyle. see the connection yet? The only difference between her and the 'mothers' that keep their kids and take out their regrets on a daily basis on the child in the form of violence is that she just had the lack of conscious that allowed her to just cut straight to the chase and end that kid's life instead of dragging it on for years.

Then give it up for adoption or hand it over the state and rescind control over this person.

She obviously can't handle being a parent and shouldn't be one.

flairon
08-27-2011, 05:57 PM
I don't really care about plant life or other animal life to the extent I care about human life. I know. I'm selfish. Though, I do think torturing animal life is wrong and allowing plant life that is damaging to the environment or introducing foreign species that end up decimating currently existing life is probably not a good idea.

There are examples of this and what it does.

I realize you now think gassing people is okay and ethnic cleansing must be okay. Real mass murder. Through your facetious comments. :)

whatever you need to support your viewpoint

tk217
08-27-2011, 05:58 PM
whatever you need to support your viewpoint

Run away...runaway....runaway....

lexinak
08-27-2011, 05:59 PM
I am personally against abortion. Even from a non-religious standpoint, I find it brutal. Killing the most intimate part of yourself and the weakest life-force of your own species is savage. With that being said, I recognize the grey area in the medical field in regards to what constitutes "human life" and when that date should be set. For that reason, I would opt for a 2 month window for abortion before any nervous system develops (whether it is functional or not), the obvious exception being the mother's health.

I also cannot stand when people say "would you rather a f*cked up single mom raise the kid" or "don't you care about how much money it would cost the nation!!!!!!111111?!?" Give the choice to your offspring. I have had friends that grew up in group homes, and they enjoy their life. At least give them the chance. Wash your hands of your responsibility and give it up for adoption (which is responsible in many cases). In regards to the cost of the state to raise these children, work it out. Allocate money for the weakest and most vulnerable members of society.

Your post sounds so simplistic ("Just make money appear to assist needy pregnant women!") that I don't think you've given any thought whatsoever to it. For instance, are the world's orphanages not full enough? Do you realize that the happy couple that sponsors a scared pregnant teenager is not common or possible in most cases? That there aren't families clamoring to adopt nonwhite, sick or deformed babies?

Furthermore, do you realize the risks inherent in pregnancy? (Let me guess, the sluts should have thought about that before spreading their legs.) It's awfully easy for you to say "oh just have the baby and work it out" when you are never going to go through the immense pain and terror of childbirth. You'll never hemmorhage and die in a hospital bed. You'll never have to worry about losing your baby and your own life to preeclampsia. There is as much reason to force a woman to undergo childbirth as there is to break her legs. After all, it hurts but it'll heal with time and she'll probably be fine... right?

blip63
08-27-2011, 05:59 PM
It shouldn't take 5 months to decide to abort anyway. Either way, if the parents realize they are not ready or if there are unforseen circumstances, they should be able to abort even after 21 weeks. I'm all for finding a way to abort in the most humane (sounds ironic but you get it) ways possible though.

It would take me 30 seconds to decide if I want a child with some bish, but that's a different story. :)

Aborting after the clump of cells develops a brain and can feel pain is cruel, and I would consider that murder. The entire abortion debate comes down to what stage you believe a fetus is a human and for me when it can feel pain that is the line that can't be crossed.

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:00 PM
yep..someone that didnt want the baby because it wasn't convenient to her lifestyle. see the connection yet? The only difference between her and the 'mothers' that keep their kids and take out their regrets on a daily basis on the child in the form of violence is that she just had the lack of conscious that allowed her to just cut straight to the chase and end that kid's life instead of dragging it on for years. Not wanting a child because it is not convenient is not the same as murdering your child because it's not convenient. It takes a pretty big jump to go from one to the other, a jump that usually involves some sort of psychosis, I would imagine.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 06:00 PM
Furniture is not a person. Voluntary on the mothers part, but its not her choice once she is carrying another life

Fetus is not a person, liar.

flairon
08-27-2011, 06:00 PM
Then give it up for adoption or hand it over the state and resend control over this person.

She obviously can't handle being a parent and shouldn't be one.

'ma'am because I personally want to tell you what to do with your body, you will be required to carry this child to term, wreck your body, pay for prenatal care, dislocate your hips, have you puking on a daily basis and in the end, get split from bellybutton to *******...so i'll feel better'

yeah..that should go over well, you should try that out on a female..see how that works out for you.

You personally could always go get a vasectomy, wear a condom, practice abstinence. And while we're at it, lets make it a law.

DocHol1day
08-27-2011, 06:00 PM
if a human being (fetus or otherwise) cannot survive without the assistance of another human for any reasonable amount of time then that human being doesnt have a RIGHT to life because its life impairs the life of another, and thus it cannot possibly be murder. whether it decided to be alive (concieved) is totally irrelevant.

besides, abortion being legal has statistically been proven to be good for society as a whole.

flairon
08-27-2011, 06:02 PM
Not wanting a child because it is not convenient is not the same as murdering your child because it's not convenient. It takes a pretty big jump to go from one to the other, a jump that usually involves some sort of psychosis, I would imagine.

It takes a big jump for you. But you're not a single parent, on welfare, maybe already have a couple kids you can't afford, aren't looking at 9 months of carrying a child, 18 years of supporting it..etc.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:03 PM
'ma'am because I personally want to tell you what to do with your body, you will be required to carry this child to term, wreck your body, pay for prenatal care, dislocate your hips, have you puking on a daily basis and in the end, get split from bellybutton to *******...so i'll feel better'

yeah..that should go over well, you should try that out on a female..see how that works out for you.

You personally could always go get a vasectomy, wear a condom, practice abstinence. And while we're at it, lets make it a law.

I didn't tell her to have sex, not take the pill, no wear protection, not get her tubes tied, not have her eggs removed, not have her ovaries removed, not do a morning after pill after unprotected sex, not choose vaginal intercourse.

There are LOTS of things you can as a partner on either side of this to NOT have kids. Your comments are pathetic at best and your arguments have no substance.

The hypocrisy here is that we allow abortions to exist despite the fact they are murdering life and yet it is okay to do that when it is illegal for you to shoot your neighbor - also murdering life.

GrokTheCube
08-27-2011, 06:05 PM
I am opposed to abortion after brain activity beings (week 21 or so), unless it is medically necessary. Prior to that, the fetus is brain dead, and I think that's legally sufficient justification, no matter my personal views.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:05 PM
It takes a big jump for you. But you're not a single parent, on welfare, maybe already have a couple kids you can't afford, aren't looking at 9 months of carrying a child, 18 years of supporting it..etc.

Then give it up for adoption.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 06:05 PM
I have to eat something, bud. If I could not damage anything I would choose that. :)

So you're a vegan?


My two and a half year old daughter is an intimate part of myself too.....

Because you love her, but she's born now, she's not litterally a part of your wife.


It is relevant when looking at your beliefs. Why are you against the death penalty but okay with abortion?

One voluntary did something so heinous to damage society in such a way as taking someones life (what the DP is for). These people harmed others. What did the fetus/baby/zygote do?

I am against the death penalty because of 1) the risk of killing innocent human beings 2) I don't think it's moral to kill someone who's experienced life, I think it's ironic to punish murderers by killing them. The most I would do is lock them up, as a matter of security.

The zygot did not do anything yet, because he's not born. He's not subject to doing something.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:06 PM
Prior to that, the fetus is brain dead, and I think that's legally sufficient justification, no matter my personal views.

I always found this argument most interesting. If you wait 1 year that fetus will have peak functional activity. This is completely different than say someone who has been unconscious for 1 year after a car accident and lives attached to a ventilator. This is legally dead.

flairon
08-27-2011, 06:07 PM
I didn't tell her to have sex, not take the pill, no wear protection, not get her tubes tied, not have her eggs removed, not have her ovaries removed, not do a morning after pill after unprotected sex, not choose vaginal intercourse.

There are LOTS of things you can as a partner on either side of this to NOT have kids. Your comments are pathetic at best and your arguments have no substance.

The hypocrisy here is that we allow abortions to exist despite the fact they are murdering life and yet it is okay to do that when it is illegal for you to shoot your neighbor - also murdering life.

and you dont get to tell her what to do afterwards either. if you dont like abortions, dont have one. Simple enough.

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:08 PM
Your post sounds so simplistic ("Just make money appear to assist needy pregnant women!") that I don't think you've given any thought whatsoever to it. For instance, are the world's orphanages not full enough? Do you realize that the happy couple that sponsors a scared pregnant teenager is not common or possible in most cases? That there aren't families clamoring to adopt nonwhite, sick or deformed babies? I already mentioned group homes. My point is simple, cut money from other government spending because pregnant women and children are of the upmost priority. And our government does have efficient programs for just those situations. If abortion was further restricted then it require an expansion of funding.


Furthermore, do you realize the risks inherent in pregnancy? (Let me guess, the sluts should have thought about that before spreading their legs.) It's awfully easy for you to say "oh just have the baby and work it out" when you are never going to go through the immense pain and terror of childbirth. You'll never hemmorhage and die in a hospital bed. You'll never have to worry about losing your baby and your own life to preeclampsia. There is as much reason to force a woman to undergo childbirth as there is to break her legs. After all, it hurts but it'll heal with time and she'll probably be fine... right?Of course personal responsibility comes to mind, but even then I can sympathize with the fear of a soon to be mother. Having 2-3 months to "figure" it out is more than enough time. Inb4 they can afford 2-300 dollars in months time. Work a minimum wage job, eat wheaties for 2 months, take out a loan, get cash back credit card, find a way. Not everything in life is going to be easy, and if you really don't want to have a child then make this happen within the parameters you are given.

Tamorlane
08-27-2011, 06:08 PM
PRO-Life is the only answer:

-God aside, life in this universe is extremely rare (Fermi Paradox indicates we may be the most advance) ; look at what can come from a life.
-A child doesn't need parents to thrive and become something and foremost, a life lived to elder age has so much experience.
-A fetus WILL take it's natural course and become a baby. It will then become a toddler, an adolsecent, a middle aged worker, and an elder.
-We need to place great emphasis on the protection of the unborn (like how the law/aid societies take over when religious people refuse blood transfusions in hospitals and the child is going to die - the law disallows that and protects the child via temporary custody)
-The problem with today's society is that is it this facade of an oxymoron called 'liberal democracy' in which people think we should have the right to do as we please, like have sex without thinking ahead of the potential consequences and just getting rid of the problem via a socially accepted method of 'abortion'. We often neglect the rights of the deceased and unborn. Focusing on the living. This is a prime example.
-'Abortion' is disrespectful. It truly is murder.
-No one would ever choose if given the chance to have their parents 'abort' them. Everyone is grateful for what they have. Ask anyone if they would wish their parents aborted them. People will look at you cock eyed...Yet we're quick to defend the people who want a quick and easy solution.
-Abortion = quick and easy solution. (typical lazy slob behavior - get rich quick, lose weight quick, get rid of being pregnant quick, etc.)

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:10 PM
and you dont get to tell her what to do afterwards either. if you dont like abortions, dont have one. Simple enough.That logic can only be extended so far: if you don't like stealing, don't steal. Simple enough.

Or, you could reverse the logic: if you don't want kids, don't have sex. Simple enough.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:10 PM
So you're a vegan?



Because you love her, but she's born now, she's not litterally a part of your wife.



I am against the death penalty because of 1) the risk of killing innocent human beings 2) I don't think it's moral to kill someone who's experienced life, I think it's ironic to punish murderers by murdering them. The most I would do is lock them up, as a matter of security.

The zygot did not do anything yet, because he's not born. He's not subject to doing something.

I can't actually drink milk/eat dairy I'm lactose intolerant. =/

But no I'm not a vegan or a vegetarian. I still eat plant life and animal life to sustain myself. Plant life alone is not enough to keep me alive to peak existence. If it could I would probably lean that way but nothing I have read or any empirical evidence I have been given expresses that.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 06:11 PM
PRO-Life is the only answer:

-God aside, life in this universe is extremely rare (Fermi Paradox indicates we may be the most advance) ; look at what can come from a life.
-A child doesn't need parents to thrive and become something and foremost, a life lived to elder age has so much experience.
-A fetus WILL take it's natural course and become a baby. It will then become a toddler, an adolsecent, a middle aged worker, and an elder.
-We need to place great emphasis on the protection of the unborn (like how the law/aid societies take over when religious people refuse blood transfusions in hospitals and the child is going to die - the law disallows that and protects the child via temporary custody)
-The problem with today's society is that is it this facade of an oxymoron called 'liberal democracy' in which people think we should have the right to do as we please, like have sex without thinking ahead of the potential consequences and just getting rid of the problem via a socially accepted method of 'abortion'. We often neglect the rights of the deceased and unborn. Focusing on the living. This is a prime example.
-'Abortion' is disrespectful. It truly is murder.
-No one would ever choose if given the chance to have their parents 'abort' them. Everyone is grateful for what they have. Ask anyone if they would wish their parents aborted them. People will look at you cock eyed...Yet we're quick to defend the people who want a quick and easy solution.
-Abortion = quick and easy solution. (typical lazy slob behavior - get rich quick, lose weight quick, get rid of being pregnant quick, etc.)

This is one of the most retarded comments you could've made. I hope this is for the lulz

GrokTheCube
08-27-2011, 06:12 PM
I always found this argument most interesting. If you wait 1 year that fetus will have peak functional activity. This is completely different than say someone who has been unconscious for 1 year after a car accident and lives attached to a ventilator. This is legally dead. In this case, I think current state is more important than potential future state. Prior to brain activity, I think it makes sense to view it as a potential human life, rather than a human life.

On a personal level, I find abortion as a form of contraception quite distasteful, but I feel that a grey area exists until there is brain activity.

flairon
08-27-2011, 06:12 PM
That logic can only be extended so far: if you don't like stealing, don't steal. Simple enough.

Or, you could reverse the logic: if you don't want kids, don't have sex. Simple enough.

but you dont get to make that choice for someone else. how hard is this to understand?

Are you also for slavery?

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:12 PM
and you dont get to tell her what to do afterwards either. if you dont like abortions, dont have one. Simple enough.

No. I will continue to attempt to educate those around me that there are alternatives to having to make such an awful decision.

There doesn't need to be a law on the books saying no abortions if that is what you think. There is already a law on the books saying it is illegal to kill another human. Rationalizing that you aren't is just that - rationalization.

The only real sticky situation that comes from this argument is during a pregnancy where the mother will die if the baby is allowed to live.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 06:13 PM
I can't actually drink milk/eat dairy I'm lactose intolerant. =/

But no I'm not a vegan or a vegetarian. I still eat plant life and animal life to sustain myself. Plant life alone is not enough to keep me alive to peak existence. If it could I would probably lean that way but nothing I have read or any empirical evidence I have been given expresses that.

And which empirical evidence have been given to you that expresses the fact that unprepared mothers are doing just fine? and that their kids are doing just fine too? and that the father is doing just fine? What evidence is there that indicates they are alive to "peak existence"?

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:14 PM
In this case, I think current state is more important than potential future state. Prior to brain activity, I think it makes sense to view it as a potential human life, rather than a human life.

On a personal level, I find abortion as a form of contraception quite distasteful, but I feel that a grey area exists until there is brain activity.

I disagree. I think the future state is what should be considered and is considered in the case of legally dead decisions to "end it."

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:14 PM
I always found this argument most interesting. If you wait 1 year that fetus will have peak functional activity. This is completely different than say someone who has been unconscious for 1 year after a car accident and lives attached to a ventilator. This is legally dead.On the surface there is an appeal to this position because of the apparent consistency. However, as you acutely pointed out, a completely brain dead person that is dependent on a ventilator has no potential to thrive. A rapidly developing human life in the womb categorically does.

flairon
08-27-2011, 06:16 PM
No. I will continue to attempt to educate those around me that there are alternatives to having to make such an awful decision.

There doesn't need to be a law on the books saying no abortions if that is what you think. There is already a law on the books saying it is illegal to kill another human. Rationalizing that you aren't is just that - rationalization.

The only real sticky situation that comes from this argument is during a pregnancy where the mother will die if the baby is allowed to live.

its a mass of cells. not a human.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:16 PM
And which empirical evidence have been given to you that expresses the fact that unprepared mothers are doing just fine? and that their kids are doing just fine too? and that the father is doing just fine? What evidence is there that indicates they are alive to "peak existence"?

Mmm...hmm. Well I find exercising daily, consuming a balanced diet based on what I have learned from nutritionist, and keeping my mind active to new subjects and a variety of studies maintains my existence to a much higher level of health and mental acuity than if I never exercised, ate only cheeze whiz from a can, and say sat in front of a wall staring at it all day.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 06:16 PM
I already mentioned group homes. My point is simple, cut money from other government spending because pregnant women and children are of the upmost priority. And our government does have efficient programs for just those situations. If abortion was further restricted then it require an expansion of funding.

Of course personal responsibility comes to mind, but even then I can sympathize with the fear of a soon to be mother. Having 2-3 months to "figure" it out is more than enough time. Inb4 they can afford 2-300 dollars in months time. Work a minimum wage job, eat wheaties for 2 months, take out a loan, get cash back credit card, find a way. Not everything in life is going to be easy, and if you really don't want to have a child then make this happen within the parameters you are given.

I don't understand anything you just said. At all. Especially in the second paragraph. I mentioned that women get sick, injured or even dead from pregnancy, and you responded with "well just accept that you're going to live in poverty because personal responsibility."

There's no reason discussing this with someone who appears to genuinely believe that once a woman has sex, her right to make choices about her own body goes out the door.

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:17 PM
but you dont get to make that choice for someone else. how hard is this to understand?

Are you also for slavery?
Why not? How is imposing a law that restricts abortion ( not absolutely prohibits) equivalent to forcing people into slavery? It's not.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:17 PM
its a mass of cells. not a human.

It is life and it is human life.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 06:17 PM
I disagree. I think the future state is what should be considered and is considered in the case of legally dead decisions to "end it."

Why should "a futur state" hold any value?

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 06:20 PM
Mmm...hmm. Well I find exercising daily, consuming a balanced diet based on what I have learned from nutritionist, and keeping my mind active to new subjects and a variety of studies maintains my existence to a much higher level of health and mental acuity than if I never exercised, ate only cheeze whiz from a can, and say sat in front of a wall staring at it all day.

You didn't answer my question.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 06:21 PM
Why not? How is imposing a law that restricts abortion ( not absolutely prohibits) equivalent to forcing people into slavery? It's not.

The burden of having to give birth.

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:21 PM
I don't understand anything you just said. At all. Especially in the second paragraph. I mentioned that women get sick, injured or even dead from pregnancy, and you responded with "well just accept that you're going to live in poverty because personal responsibility."

There's no reason discussing this with someone who appears to genuinely believe that once a woman has sex, her right to make choices about her own body goes out the door.
Maybe cliffs will help you comprehend my two points:

- human life is valuable enough that the government must reallocate money towards helping unwanted children.

- a women, after having sex, should have a short window period to make her decision whether to end the nascent human life that carries her genes.

* there's little sense arguing with someone that supports unrestricted late term abortions. Isn't that your position?

flairon
08-27-2011, 06:21 PM
Why not? How is imposing a law that restricts abortion ( not absolutely prohibits) equivalent to forcing people into slavery? It's not.

how is legislating what someone MUST do with their body not slavery?

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:23 PM
The burden of having to give birth.The burden of having to work a job in order to eat food.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:23 PM
Why should "a futur state" hold any value?

The same reason we look to the future on when is it okay to pull the plug on a legally brain dead individual.

If we see no empirical evidence that this individual will "get better" and become a productive member of society again and the state or those around them (who ever is the care taker / expelling the resources to keep this individual alive) decide to stop they should not be held accountable in the same level of mens rea as one who is attacking another person.

The future state is what we are focusing on when these decisions of "cutting the cord."

This individual will die all on their own and have no probable likelihood of "getting better" the same argument made for "it is a human clump of cells."

They are not a healthy active human who could be put to use to become a productive member once again.

This is the exact opposite in the case of a fetus, baby, or zygote.

frasersteen
08-27-2011, 06:25 PM
PRO-Life is the only answer:

-God aside, life in this universe is extremely rare (Fermi Paradox indicates we may be the most advance) ; look at what can come from a life.
-A child doesn't need parents to thrive and become something and foremost, a life lived to elder age has so much experience.
-A fetus WILL take it's natural course and become a baby. It will then become a toddler, an adolsecent, a middle aged worker, and an elder.
-We need to place great emphasis on the protection of the unborn (like how the law/aid societies take over when religious people refuse blood transfusions in hospitals and the child is going to die - the law disallows that and protects the child via temporary custody)
-The problem with today's society is that is it this facade of an oxymoron called 'liberal democracy' in which people think we should have the right to do as we please, like have sex without thinking ahead of the potential consequences and just getting rid of the problem via a socially accepted method of 'abortion'. We often neglect the rights of the deceased and unborn. Focusing on the living. This is a prime example.
-'Abortion' is disrespectful. It truly is murder.
-No one would ever choose if given the chance to have their parents 'abort' them. Everyone is grateful for what they have. Ask anyone if they would wish their parents aborted them. People will look at you cock eyed...Yet we're quick to defend the people who want a quick and easy solution.
-Abortion = quick and easy solution. (typical lazy slob behavior - get rich quick, lose weight quick, get rid of being pregnant quick, etc.)

Not if it is given birth to.

A fetus is not a person until it can survive without it's mother, and just because medicine has developed artificial wombs does not change that, you can keep a heart alive without a body but you wouldn't describe that as a human.

If it can be removed, and it can eat sh*t and piss on it's own then it is a human (disease and defects aside).

A fetus can't choose sh*t I don't see how it is relevant. Hell a 1 month old baby cannot really make any decisions.

Abortion is a good way of preventing a lot of pain and suffering.

Also it's not pro-life it is anti-choice. More to the point it is not for you or I to decide what someone else does with their body.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:25 PM
how is legislating what someone MUST do with their body not slavery?

How is it not legislating slavery when you put someone in prison?

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 06:26 PM
The same reason we look to the future on when is it okay to pull the plug on a legally brain dead individual.

If we see no empirical evidence that this individual will "get better" and become a productive member of society again and the state or those around them (who ever is the care taker / expelling the resources to keep this individual alive) decide to stop they should not be held accountable in the same level of mens rea as one who is attacking another person.

The future state is what we are focusing on when these decisions of "cutting the cord."

This individual will die all on their own and have no probable likelihood of "getting better" the same argument made for "it is a human clump of cells."

They are not a healthy active human who could be put to use to become a productive member once again.

This is the exact opposite in the case of a fetus, baby, or zygote.

The difference is that a braindead person is born, raised and wanted.

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:26 PM
how is legislating what someone MUST do with their body not slavery?Depends on the definition. If the definition is a restriction of freedoms then yes. Drug and prostitution prohibitions would also, then, qualify as slavery.

GrokTheCube
08-27-2011, 06:28 PM
I disagree. I think the future state is what should be considered and is considered in the case of legally dead decisions to "end it." Not always, look at DNRs for example. Even if there is a chance someone could recover, family members are still allowed to request that ventilator/feeding tube be removed.

There is without a doubt a grey area prior to that point. We are not talking about a current human life, we are talking about a potential human life. If we start protecting that stage of potential life, where do we draw the line? Embryo? Zygote (morning after pill)? Sperm (condom)? Those are all, without a doubt, potential human life.

Drawing the line at current life just seems like the most sensible way to do it to me.

When you talk about start talking about medical reasons or rape, I see no reason to oppose abortion at any point. In those cases, you are giving someone that chance to choose between themselves and the unborn, which seems fair to me. I don't think legally requiring someone to put themselves in medical risk for another human being is justifiable.

flairon
08-27-2011, 06:28 PM
It is life and it is human life.

so lets say your wife/girlfriend gets pregnant, and through prenatal testing you find out that child is going to be born with a whole host of mental and physical defects that will make its life, as short as it will be, a complete bed ridden hell full of medical procedures and quality of life that is practically non existent would you still be against termination?

flairon
08-27-2011, 06:29 PM
Depends on the definition. If the definition is a restriction of freedoms then yes. Drug and prostitution prohibitions would also, then, qualify as slavery.

you mean like restriction of the freedom of choice for what to do with her body?

GoJu
08-27-2011, 06:31 PM
. More to the point it is not for you or I to decide what someone else does with their body.

Eventually the fetus does enter into a symbiotic relationship with the mother once it develops to a certain point, of all the arguments for abortion, this has to be the weakest one; I don't know why people keep using it.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:31 PM
You didn't answer my question.

I thought it was rhetorical based on the loaded language. My bad.

You always have options such as giving your child up for adoption. These kids will probably be better off in a family that has the financial ability to provide for the child than you do as an unprepared mother. Peak existence is just that - getting to the best you can get too. Living in a box on the street might be peak existence for these kids to these unprepared mothers.

If these fathers care in the least much like these mothers they can make hard decisions that don't include abortion as a means of birth control.

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:32 PM
you mean like restriction of the freedom of choice for what to do with her body?Exactly what I mean, although certainly not analogous to being owned as a slave and not owning a single aspect of your life. Just like a prostitute is being restricted his or her freedom of choice to do what they want with their body.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:34 PM
so lets say your wife/girlfriend gets pregnant, and through prenatal testing you find out that child is going to be born with a whole host of mental and physical defects that will make its life, as short as it will be, a complete bed ridden hell full of medical procedures and quality of life that is practically non existent would you still be against termination?

Sadly in this situation I would hope to comfort my child as best as I could. This would be a horrific existence for both me, my wife/girlfriend, and the fate of my child. At least I would know them for a short period. I would hope the medical community (assuming I could afford it) or the state (if I couldn't) or society (through charity) would aide me in allowing my child to exist in as little pain as possible prior to certain death.

flairon
08-27-2011, 06:34 PM
Exactly what I mean, although certainly not analogous to being owned as a slave and not owning a single aspect of your life. Just like a prostitute is being restricted his or her freedom of choice to do what the want with their body.
so then you agree that making abortion illegal is akin to slavery? Because after all you are telling a woman what she can and can't do with her body.

GoJu
08-27-2011, 06:36 PM
Sadly in this situation I would hope to comfort my child as best as I could. This would be a horrific existence for both me, my wife/girlfriend, and the fate of my child. At least I would know them for a short period. I would hope the medical community (assuming I could afford it) or the state (if I couldn't) or society (through charity) would aide me in allowing my child to exist in as little pain as possible prior to certain death.

I would care enough about my child not put it through an existence like that.

GrokTheCube
08-27-2011, 06:37 PM
Sadly in this situation I would hope to comfort my child as best as I could. This would be a horrific existence for both me, my wife/girlfriend, and the fate of my child. At least I would know them for a short period. I would hope the medical community (assuming I could afford it) or the state (if I couldn't) or society (through charity) would aide me in allowing my child to exist in as little pain as possible prior to certain death.Why not opt to prevent the suffering from happening at all in that situation? To me, that is perfectly sensible justification for abortion, far different from it being used as a form of contraception.

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:38 PM
so then you agree that making abortion illegal is akin to slavery? Because after all you are telling a woman what she can and can't do with her body."Slavery" in a carefully qualified sense that is more similar to a prohibition of prostitution than African American slavery. Would you agree?

GrokTheCube
08-27-2011, 06:39 PM
so then you agree that making abortion illegal is akin to slavery? Because after all you are telling a woman what she can and can't do with her body.No, it's telling a woman that she can't do something to her own body that will kill another human. It's the same reason smoking in a car with your kids with the windows up is considered child abuse in many places. You're doing something to your body that has a direct deleterious impact on another.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:39 PM
Not always, look at DNRs for example. Even if there is a chance someone could recover, family members are still allowed to request that ventilator/feeding tube be removed.

There is without a doubt a grey area prior to that point. We are not talking about a current human life, we are talking about a potential human life. If we start protecting that stage of potential life, where do we draw the line? Embryo? Zygote (morning after pill)? Sperm (condom)? Those are all, without a doubt, potential human life.

Drawing the line at current life just seems like the most sensible way to do it to me.

When you talk about start talking about medical reasons or rape, I see no reason to oppose abortion at any point. In those cases, you are giving someone that chance to choose between themselves and the unborn, which seems fair to me. I don't think legally requiring someone to put themselves in medical risk for another human being is justifiable.

Unborn babies can't write up DNRs. That is a pointless statement.

The sperm is not human life -- it only has half and the ovum is the same. That is why jerking it isn't murder and having a period isn't murder.

Rape and medical reasons are something completely different and I agree. That is a much more sticky situation and a topic to itself.

flairon
08-27-2011, 06:40 PM
"Slavery" in a carefully qualified sense that is more similar to a prohibition of prostitution than African American slavery. Would you agree?
so we're going to split hairs on the definition of slavery...but not on 'life'? lol..sure.

patrick4588
08-27-2011, 06:40 PM
im pro life outside of rape cases.

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:41 PM
I would care enough about my child not put it through an existence like that.It really is a slippery slope. My sister had an 85%+ chance that she wouldn't survive a week after birth, and if she did then she was sure to die in the following months. She is 22 years old, special needs, healthy and happy, plays sports and works at a pre-school.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 06:41 PM
I thought it was rhetorical based on the loaded language. My bad.

You always have options such as giving your child up for adoption. These kids will probably be better off in a family that has the financial ability to provide for the child than you do as an unprepared mother. Peak existence is just that - getting to the best you can get too. Living in a box on the street might be peak existence for these kids to these unprepared mothers.

If these fathers care in the least much like these mothers they can make hard decisions that don't include abortion as a means of birth control.

You also have the option of just not giving birth. Why isn't that an option? Bear in mind that it's not just a matter of financial ability but a matter of not being with one's true biological parents.


Sadly in this situation I would hope to comfort my child as best as I could. This would be a horrific existence for both me, my wife/girlfriend, and the fate of my child. At least I would know them for a short period. I would hope the medical community (assuming I could afford it) or the state (if I couldn't) or society (through charity) would aide me in allowing my child to exist in as little pain as possible prior to certain death.

Why wouldn't you just prevent him from existing.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:42 PM
Why not opt to prevent the suffering from happening at all in that situation? To me, that is perfectly sensible justification for abortion, far different from it being used as a form of contraception.

Legally I don't think society would allow me. If it did I don't see anything wrong with suicide to escape pain.

The likelihood of finding out all this medical data outside of doing a gene-test (which you can do) to determine if your partner/you are okay with producing children without things like St. Elmos fire is low prior to being well beyond the current legal "date."

That is why I have to go to society, the state, and the medical community to reduce the suffering and pain as much as possible.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 06:44 PM
It really is a slippery slope. My sister had an 85%+ chance that she wouldn't survive a week after birth, and if she did then she was sure to die in the following months. She is 22 years old, special needs, healthy and happy, plays sports and works at a pre-school.

Yet if she was aborted, she wouldn't even know what she'd be missing because she wouldn't exist.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:44 PM
You also have the option of just not giving birth. Why isn't that an option? Bear in mind that it's not just a matter of financial ability but a matter of not being with one's true biological parents.



Why wouldn't you just prevent him from existing.

I don't see why having a biological parent is so important?

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:45 PM
so we're going to split hairs on the definition of slavery...but not on 'life'? lol..sure.We kind of have to, given the multiple ways in which slavery is defined. I am a slave to alcohol addiction or I am a sex slave that is exploited.
slav·er·y *(slv-r, slvr)
n. pl. slav·er·ies
1. The state of one bound in servitude as the property of a slaveholder or household.
2.
a. The practice of owning slaves.
b. A mode of production in which slaves constitute the principal work force.
3. The condition of being subject or addicted to a specified influence.
4. A condition of hard work and subjection: wage slavery.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?word=slavery

So do you agree with my comparison or not? Is a restriction on abortion more like a restriction on prostitution or African American slavery?

And what constitutes life is open for discussion which I explicitly said in an earlier post ITT which you must have missed.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:45 PM
Yet if she was aborted, she wouldn't even know what she'd be missing because she wouldn't exist.

And the point of this asinine statement?

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 06:46 PM
I don't see why having a biological parent is so important?

Yup, I'm sure I'd love to know that my real parents gave me away because they didn't love me enough to sacrifice themselves to keep me. I would certainly not feel unwanted in this world.

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:46 PM
Yet if she was aborted, she wouldn't even know what she'd be missing because she wouldn't exist.Same as you and I. Yet, given the opportunity to decide for yourself, you clearly would choose to live, right?

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 06:47 PM
And the point of this asinine statement?

The point is that you guys are giving too much value to the "concept" of life rather than the actual repercussions in reality.

GrokTheCube
08-27-2011, 06:47 PM
Unborn babies can't write up DNRs. That is a pointless statement. My point was simply that current state is often considered in the law. As I said in my other example, a family member can have another taken off a ventilator/feeding tube even if there is a chance of recovery.


The sperm is not human life -- it only has half and the ovum is the same. That is why jerking it isn't murder and having a period isn't murder.
So at what point is the line drawn? As soon as the sperm and egg meet, meaning morning after pill and IUDs are a no go? That seems a bit extreme to me, if so.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 06:48 PM
Same as you and I. Yet, given the opportunity to decide for yourself, you clearly would choose to live, right?

I know people who would choose not to.

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:48 PM
Yup, I'm sure I'd love to know that my real parents gave me away because they didn't love me enough to sacrifice themselves to keep me. I would certainly not feel unwanted in this world.That hardly seems like a reason not to continue living or trying to find happiness in life.

GoJu
08-27-2011, 06:48 PM
It really is a slippery slope. My sister had an 85%+ chance that she wouldn't survive a week after birth, and if she did then she was sure to die in the following months. She is 22 years old, special needs, healthy and happy, plays sports and works at a pre-school.

I'm aware of cases like that as well and they do give pause for one to think more deeply about the issue, I would say she got lucky though.

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:49 PM
I know people who would choose not to.So did I, and they committed suicide (srs). They, however, were able to make that choice.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:50 PM
Yup, I'm sure I'd love to know that my real parents gave me away because they didn't love me enough to sacrifice themselves to keep me. I would certainly not feel unwanted in this world.

Rather than they love you so much they know you'd have a better life, better opportunities, and hopefully truly happy.

GoJu
08-27-2011, 06:51 PM
Same as you and I. Yet, given the opportunity to decide for yourself, you clearly would choose to live, right?

I know some people on the net who say they would appreciate that life not had been imposed on them for various reasons and that in the end it would've been better if they hadn't existed since they wouldn't have had to suffer through life and they wouldn't know what they're missing if anything at all; most are against suicide ironically enough (you might know the philosophy of antinatalism, I'm not one of them just saiyan)

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 06:51 PM
So did I, and they committed suicide (srs). They, however, were able to make that choice.

If you are healthy, you don't commit suicide. You can still think of this life as ****ty and meaningless. I don't get why we should put the "choice" of a merely unconscious mass of cells over the one of a grown adult who will most likely suffer from the repercussions of giving birth while being unprepared.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:52 PM
The point is that you guys are giving too much value to the "concept" of life rather than the actual repercussions in reality.

This concept is actually how law is written currently. I understand there are sociological, political, and economical factors in society in regard to abortion, adoption, group homes, orphanages, and foster care.

I really do.

The problem is we are deluding ourselves when writing these laws by ignoring science and rationalizing some pristine reality.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 06:52 PM
Rather than they love you so much they know you'd have a better life, better opportunities, and hopefully truly happy.

Because that's how most kids think? Right..

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:52 PM
I'm aware of cases like that as well and they do give pause for one to think more deeply about the issue, I would say she got lucky though.Perhaps, but whether luck or providence or medical care or a combination of all three she still not only survived but thrived.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:53 PM
My point was simply that current state is often considered in the law. As I said in my other example, a family member can have another taken off a ventilator/feeding tube even if there is a chance of recovery.

So at what point is the line drawn? As soon as the sperm and egg meet, meaning morning after pill and IUDs are a no go? That seems a bit extreme to me, if so.

I am unsure how they just meet at a bar. :)

You always have options PRIOR to vaginal sex. Be smart. It is just like claiming you have no opportunity to not getting a DUI.

I can't prove that the zygote was formed anyhow if you are taking the morning after pill right after unprotected sex.

I can't.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 06:53 PM
This concept is actually how law is written currently. I understand there are sociological, political, and economical factors in society in regard to abortion, adoption, group homes, orphanages, and foster care.

I really do.

The problem is we are deluding ourselves when writing these laws by ignoring science and rationalizing some pristine reality.

Murder 1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

Where's the murder in abortion?

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 06:54 PM
I am unsure how they just meet at a bar. :)

You always have options PRIOR to vaginal sex. Be smart. It is just like claiming you have no opportunity to not getting a DUI.

People make mistakes.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:55 PM
Because that's how most kids think? Right..

Sorry you're emo?

I don't know what to say. I was pretty happy as a kid.

ONtop888
08-27-2011, 06:56 PM
I know some people on the net who say they would appreciate that life not had been imposed on them for various reasons and that in the end it would've been better if they hadn't existed since they wouldn't have had to suffer through life and they wouldn't know what they're missing if anything at all (you might know the philosophy of antinatalism, I'm not one of them just saiyan)


If you are healthy, you don't commit suicide. You can still think of this life as ****ty and meaningless. I don't get why we should put the "choice" of a merely unconscious mass of cells over the one of a grown adult who will most likely suffer from the repercussions of giving birth while being unprepared.
Yet ultimately if they choose to continue living then they have decided that life is better than death, at least once alive, for whatever reason, maybe hope for the future. Also, most people go through points in their lives where the are like that. I was for over 2 years. In fact, my daily prayer to whatever God might be listening was to end my life or change it. Just saying brothems.

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:56 PM
People make mistakes.

They do. I make them all the time, and just like when I do, I own up to them. They should face consequences for these mistakes too. Take some personal responsibility.

GoJu
08-27-2011, 06:57 PM
Murder 1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

Where's the murder in abortion?

Fetus is a human when it develops its brain and nervous system...

tk217
08-27-2011, 06:58 PM
Murder 1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

Where's the murder in abortion?

Unlawful killing of another human being -- especially with premeditation? Possibly malice if you're resentful of the fetus (case of rape/hate the father/break up with boyfriend).

GoJu
08-27-2011, 07:00 PM
Yet ultimately if they choose to continue living then they have decided that life is better than death, at least once alive, for whatever reason, maybe hope for the future. Also, most people go through points in their lives where the are like that. I was for over 2 years. In fact, my daily prayer to whatever God might be listening was to end my life or change it. Just saying brothems.

They say that non-existent can't suffer and by definition they can't miss whatever future awaits them, again I'm not of this philosophy but just saiyan.

I'm in a similar point in my life I think so I can relate to hoping for the future.

tk217
08-27-2011, 07:02 PM
They say that non-existent can't suffer and by definition they can't miss whatever future awaits them, again I'm not of this philosophy but just saiyan.

I'm in a similar point in my life I think so I can relate to hoping for the future.

Even if you don't want to go on living -- you at least had the opportunity to live and make that decision after being alive.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 07:05 PM
Sorry you're emo?

I don't know what to say. I was pretty happy as a kid.

Not one bit, just saying that most kids don't have the ability to fully rationalize and to put everything in perspective.


Yet ultimately if they choose to continue living then they have decided that life is better than death, at least once alive, for whatever reason, maybe hope for the future. Also, most people go through points in their lives where the are like that. I was for over 2 years. In fact, my daily prayer to whatever God might be listening was to end my life or change it. Just saying brothems.

Survival instinct. People can prefer to not exist than to exist and still not able to commit suicide.


They do. I make them all the time, and just like when I do, I own up to them. They should face consequences for these mistakes too. Take some personal responsibility.

Yes consequences who'll have repercussions for a lifetime, sure.


Fetus is a human when it develops its brain and nervous system...

You should have taken the decision to abort before it develops a full nervous system. Even then, you have the word "unlawful", and what is unlawful is pretty much subjective depending on your moral code.

tk217
08-27-2011, 07:12 PM
Not one bit, just saying that most kids don't have the ability to fully rationalize and to put everything in perspective.

Yes consequences who'll have repercussions for a lifetime, sure.

Fine. They are kids. They have yet to fully develop their frontal lobe. Give them time and reassure them. Most people do become fine upstanding people who work hard and get by in life.

All the more reason education is important - especially sex education. It can cause life-long things to occur.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 07:20 PM
Fine. They are kids. They have yet to fully develop their frontal lobe. Give them time and reassure them. Most people do become fine upstanding people who work hard and get by in life.

All the more reason education is important - especially sex education. It can cause life-long things to occur.

Lol you make it seem like a walk in the park. Have you had any personal experience or did you study the issue to claim "most people are just doing a-okay"? Or are you pulling it out of your a$$.

Besides, that's not even the point. The point is that

situation 1: Parents abort, they can learn from their mistakes become more mature, and wait untill they're ready to have a child. The aborted organic mass has no knowledge or consciousness whatsoever about what his life could've potentially been in a parallel universe.

situation 2: Parents do not abort. Burden of giving birth on them, chances of messing up a child and their whole life.

tk217
08-27-2011, 07:26 PM
situation 1: Parents abort, they can learn from their mistakes become more mature, and wait untill they're ready to have a child. The aborted organic mass has no knowledge or consciousness whatsoever about what his life could've potentially been in a parallel universe.

situation 2: Parents do not abort. Burden of giving birth on them, chances of messing up a child and their whole life.

In both these cases the parents are being selfish. They're stealing another person's life in one. And they're ruining another person's life in the other.

If these people really think they're doing a dis-service to their child they should give them up for adoption and then contemplate those mistakes, how it made them feel, and apply this knowledge to their future decisions in addition to the state/society applying some education to these people as they apparently need it.

You make it seem so easy to abort a child. Almost like you're fascinated by it.... it is somewhat disturbing.

flairon
08-27-2011, 07:29 PM
We kind of have to, given the multiple ways in which slavery is defined. I am a slave to alcohol addiction or I am a sex slave that is exploited.
slav·er·y *(slv-r, slvr)
n. pl. slav·er·ies
1. The state of one bound in servitude as the property of a slaveholder or household.
2.
a. The practice of owning slaves.
b. A mode of production in which slaves constitute the principal work force.
3. The condition of being subject or addicted to a specified influence.
4. A condition of hard work and subjection: wage slavery.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?word=slavery

So do you agree with my comparison or not? Is a restriction on abortion more like a restriction on prostitution or African American slavery?

And what constitutes life is open for discussion which I explicitly said in an earlier post ITT which you must have missed.

a restriction on prostitution is a public safety issue, a restriction on abortion is a moral issue. No abortion is not like a ban on prostitution.

African American (or any other slavery) is like a ban on abortion as defined by the above definition #3, #4 and by the definition of servitude, #1

tk217
08-27-2011, 07:31 PM
a restriction on prostitution is a public safety issue, a restriction on abortion is a moral issue. No abortion is not like a ban on prostitution.

African American (or any other slavery) is like a ban on abortion as defined by the above definition #3, #4 and by the definition of servitude, #1

Restricting prostitution is a safety issue? I don't get it? How is this any different than having thousands of random sexual partners?

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 07:32 PM
In both these cases the parents are being selfish. They're stealing another person's life in one. And they're ruining another person's life in the other.

If these people really think they're doing a dis-service to their child they should give them up for adoption and then contemplate those mistakes, how it made them feel, and apply this knowledge to their future decisions in addition to the state/society applying some education to these people as they apparently need it.

You make it seem so easy to abort a child. Almost like you're fascinated by it.... it is somewhat disturbing.

You're playing with semantics. We all know pure altruism doesn't exist but aborting is the lesser of two evils, and I wouldn't even consider it evil if that mass of cell isn't conscious or hasn't developped the caracteristics of a sentient being.

I'd rather think YOUR moral code is being selfish because you're trying to push your view that any potential future life should have as much value as a sentient person/being. In other words, you decide to draw an arbitrary line at as soon as the sperm meets the egg, which is completely irrational and purely emotional.

flairon
08-27-2011, 07:35 PM
Restricting prostitution is a safety issue? I don't get it? How is this any different than having thousands of random sexual partners?


because nobody has thousands of random sex partners? The average male has about 5-7, regardless of what they are telling you in the locker room.

tk217
08-27-2011, 07:36 PM
You're playing with semantics. We all know pure altruism doesn't exist but aborting is the lesser of two evils, and I wouldn't even consider it evil if that mass of cell isn't conscious or hasn't developped the caracteristics of a sentient being.

I'd rather think YOUR moral code is being selfish because you're trying to push your view that any potential future life should have as much value as a sentient person/being. In other words, you decide to draw an arbitrary line at as soon as the sperm meets the egg, which is completely irrational and purely emotional.

How is my line arbitrary when science is the one dictating it?

cncman
08-27-2011, 07:36 PM
I'm with OP, you people are insane.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 07:37 PM
How is my line arbitrary when science is the one dictating it?

Since when does science dictate morality? What does science say that helps your case?

tk217
08-27-2011, 07:38 PM
because nobody has thousands of random sex partners? The average male has about 5-7, regardless of what they are telling you in the locker room.

So, are you telling me that those who would be total sluts in the gay, bi, straight -- communities and sleep around constantly should be banned from society?

tk217
08-27-2011, 07:39 PM
Since when science dictates morality?

You tell me? Hence my line (conception) isn't arbitrary.

flairon
08-27-2011, 07:41 PM
So, are you telling me that those who would be total sluts in the gay, bi, straight -- communities and sleep around constantly should be banned from society?
no...i'm telling you those that make a job of sex have been shown to spread disease through studies and therefore the activity is restricted through legislation. how you extrapolate it from there to shore up your argument is all you.

tk217
08-27-2011, 07:42 PM
no...i'm telling you those that make a job of sex have been shown to spread disease through studies and therefore the activity is restricted through legislation. how you extrapolate it from there to shore up your argument is all you.

Interesting, so a slut who makes no money doing what they do -- somehow is okay. Though a whore making money off it isn't.

What is your view on pornographic film and the actors who star in them?

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 07:42 PM
You tell me? Hence my line (conception) isn't arbitrary.

How is it not arbitrary when you decided that each stage from the first seconds of conception to a 10 years old kid held the same value?

tk217
08-27-2011, 07:44 PM
How is it not arbitrary when you decided that each stage from the first seconds of conception to a 10 years old kid held the same value?

BECAUSE I DIDN'T DECIDE. It is empirical evidence that when a sperm and an ovum meet and become a zygote that is a new living organism.

It isn't sperm from my balls (part of me) nor is it an ovum (part of her). It is a new life form.

By zeus this is difficult.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 07:47 PM
BECAUSE I DIDN'T DECIDE. It is empirical evidence that when a sperm and an ovum meet and become a zygote that is a new living organism.

It isn't sperm from my balls (part of me) nor is it an ovum (part of her). It is a new life form.

By zeus this is difficult.

Yet you decided that a new life form at any stage from the first seconds of conception to a 15 years old kid should be treated morally the same way, even though the more than significant biological differences.

You drew the line at "any new life form", that is arbitrary.

flairon
08-27-2011, 07:48 PM
Interesting, so a slut who makes no money doing what they do -- somehow is okay. Though a whore making money off it isn't.

What is your view on pornographic film and the actors who star in them?

you do realize that there is a difference between a non legal hooker on the street and a prostitute in a city/state/country that has the proper legislation as well as someone on the porn industry where both of the latter are monitored, require regular medical testing and checkups and are denied the ability to legally work if they dont... right?

tk217
08-27-2011, 07:56 PM
Yet you decided that a new life form at any stage from the first seconds of conception to a 15 years old kid should be treated morally the same way, even though the more than significant biological differences.

You drew the line at "any new life form", that is arbitrary.

LOL. :)

I hold them to the same level yes because they are both living beings with futures and potential.

Bsip
08-27-2011, 07:56 PM
If an early fetus is just a part of a women's body, why would she have and abortion?....because it's destined to become a human being. When you interfere with that process, you're interfering with the cycle of human life.

tk217
08-27-2011, 07:57 PM
you do realize that there is a difference between a non legal hooker on the street and a prostitute in a city/state/country that has the proper legislation as well as someone on the porn industry where both of the latter are monitored, require regular medical testing and checkups and are denied the ability to legally work if they dont... right?

Oh I see. So, if we do aids tests on prostitutes it is okay. Right?

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 08:01 PM
LOL. :)

I hold them to the same level yes because they are both living beings with futures and potential.

And the caracteristic on which you rely on to value them the same is an arbitrary line you're drawing. on what premises are you working and what is your rationale?

flairon
08-27-2011, 08:01 PM
Oh I see. So, if we do aids tests on prostitutes it is okay. Right?

Hence the legislation and partial prohibition.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 08:02 PM
If an early fetus is just a part of a women's body, why would she have and abortion?....because it's destined to become a human being. When you interfere with that process, you're interfering with the cycle of human life.

And what's wrong with interfering with the "cycle of human life" as you put it, especially when that organic matter hasn't even developped a nervous system?

lexinak
08-27-2011, 08:02 PM
Maybe cliffs will help you comprehend my two points:

- human life is valuable enough that the government must reallocate money towards helping unwanted children.

- a women, after having sex, should have a short window period to make her decision whether to end the nascent human life that carries her genes.

* there's little sense arguing with someone that supports unrestricted late term abortions. Isn't that your position?

And what do you suggest for women who, for whatever reason, do not discover that they're pregnant until after your brilliant "short window period"? Or for women who discover their fetuses are dead and must undergo a D&C to remove it or risk infection? Or for women who discover their fetuses will not survive the first hour after birth? Or for women who have ectopic pregnancies? Or...

I support unrestricted abortion on demand, no questions asked and no sluts shamed. This is because I don't think that you, I, or a 70-year-old man in the Senate know better than a pregnant woman what the best choice is for her. I don't believe that women will get pregnant and then have abortions at 8 months for ****s and giggles, so hypothetical questions about the evilness of that scenario are moot.

There will always be an exception to every rule that you can come up with where abortion is concerned. Someone needs one and they will suffer without it, regardless of how well-intentioned your rules were. I do not believe that the "rights" of a fetus should ever be held in higher esteem than the rights of the pregnant woman. That is where I appear to differ from most people on this forum - not being women, not knowing the experience of a pregnant woman, they forget that there's an unambiguously real human being in the middle of this garbage "debate" who deserves the highest respect and consideration of all the actors involved.

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:03 PM
And the caracteristic on which you rely on to value them the same is an arbitrary line you're drawing. on what premises are you working and what is your rationale?

The arbitrary line of existing? Huh. Not very arbitrary if it is from the start.

Should I be including non-existing individuals in this or postmortem?

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:04 PM
Hence the legislation and partial prohibition.

So, should these sluts who sleep with people also be forced to take invasive aids tests? It isn't like they're in this for a business. It is just for the fun.

flairon
08-27-2011, 08:07 PM
So, should these sluts who sleep with people also be forced to take invasive aids tests? It isn't like they're in this for a business. It is just for the fun.

Like i said before, regardless of what you hear in the locker room people (who aren't in the sex industry) statistically do not have 1000's of sexual partners. I know all your buddies are telling you they are banging chicks by the truck load, and the ones they get shot down by are 'sluts', but in reality..its just doesnt happen that way.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 08:07 PM
The arbitrary line of existing? Huh. Not very arbitrary if it is from the start.

Should I be including non-existing individuals in this or postmortem?

The arbitrary line that any life form should be treated morally the same is indeed a very arbitrary one. I could just as well draw the line at any life form who has formed a nervous system. Pushing your moral code on the one that suffers the most from the issue is almost religious. Bottom line is, it's the woman's body and her rights.

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:09 PM
Like i said before, regardless of what you hear in the locker room people (who aren't in the sex industry) statistically do not have 1000's of sexual partners. I know all your buddies are telling you they are banging chicks by the truck load, and the ones they get shot down by are 'sluts', but in reality..its just doesnt happen that way.

You aren't answering the question.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 08:10 PM
You aren't answering the question.

His post meant no, if I didn't misread.

flairon
08-27-2011, 08:11 PM
You aren't answering the question.

actually im answering the question that will follow the question. I see where you're trying to direct the conversation to, so I'm just heading you off at the pass.

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:11 PM
The arbitrary line that any life form should be treated morally the same is indeed a very arbitrary one. I could just as well draw the line at any life form who has formed a nervous system. Pushing your moral code on the one that suffers the most from the issue is almost religious. Bottom line is, it's the woman's body and her rights.

No no, nice try with your debate tactics. You apparently don't understand what arbitrary means if you state something like that.

Conception isn't arbitrary. It is when life begins. That is a fact. I'm not going to even hear your statements claiming otherwise because that isn't true. Go get a biology book.

You're the one making an arbitrary statement that somehow claiming that a fetus is different than a 12 year old despite future and potential that is apparent, obvious, and known fact that the longer you wait the more the fetus turns into that same 12 year old.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 08:15 PM
No no, nice try with your debate tactics. You apparently don't understand what arbitrary means if you state something like that.

Conception isn't arbitrary. It is when life begins. That is a fact. I'm not going to even hear your statements claiming otherwise because that isn't true. Go get a biology book.

You're the one making an arbitrary statement that somehow claiming that a fetus is different than a 12 year old despite future and potential that is apparent, obvious, and known fact that the longer you wait the more the fetus turns into that same 12 year old.

Is a fetus any different biologically than a 12 years old? If you answer yes, than I can just as much draw a line on whatever difference there is, for example, consciousness or being sentient.

Your view that "potential life" or "potential sentient being" is somehow sacred is relative, and you shouldn't push it on others.

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:15 PM
actually im answering the question that will follow the question. I see where you're trying to direct the conversation to, so I'm just heading you off at the pass.

Actually you're avoiding the real underlying question:

Why is it not a safety concern for people to sleep around (with no money involved) and is a safety concern for people to sleep around (when money is involved).

You're demanding one from a business. You're not demanding one from a "hobby" or leisure activity. If I have a house and invite random people over to have sex with online and promote it -- I am not a prostitute because I am not getting paid but I am sleeping with a lot of people.

How is this different in the idea of safety.

Purposefully avoiding a question doesn't make you smart.

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:16 PM
Is a fetus any different biologically than a 12 years old?

Will a fetus be any different than a 12 year old in 12 years? Answer that.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 08:17 PM
I thought it was rhetorical based on the loaded language. My bad.

You always have options such as giving your child up for adoption. These kids will probably be better off in a family that has the financial ability to provide for the child than you do as an unprepared mother. Peak existence is just that - getting to the best you can get too. Living in a box on the street might be peak existence for these kids to these unprepared mothers.

If these fathers care in the least much like these mothers they can make hard decisions that don't include abortion as a means of birth control.

I suppose you could just give the child up for adoption... if you weren't already unwilling to be pregnant and give birth. I don't think you, as a male, have given nearly enough thought to what pregnancy and childbirth are like for the woman undergoing them. Or did you waste any time thinking about her at all?

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:19 PM
I suppose you could just give the child up for adoption... if you weren't already unwilling to be pregnant and give birth. I don't think you, as a male, have given nearly enough thought to what pregnancy and childbirth are like for the woman undergoing them. Or did you waste any time thinking about her at all?

Sexism. GTFO.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 08:19 PM
Will a fetus be any different than a 12 year old in 12 years? Answer that.

Lol nice cop-out. Why are you extrapolating? We don't know. He could die before the age of 12 years old. How is what something WILL be relevant to what it is and how it should be treated morally? Again, you're assuming we should treat any life form the same according to your moral code.

It is pretty much obvious that, now that you realize you're just pushing a moral code on others, you'll resort to non-sensical statement like this one.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 08:20 PM
Sexism. GTFO.

Sexism is discussing abortion without a thought for the pregnant woman, you moron. It's easy for you to say "oh just have the baby" when you forget that women DIE in labor all the goddamned time. You have no ****ing right to force any woman to undergo that against her will.

Tamorlane
08-27-2011, 08:21 PM
Not if it is given birth to.

A fetus is not a person until it can survive without it's mother, and just because medicine has developed artificial wombs does not change that, you can keep a heart alive without a body but you wouldn't describe that as a human.

If it can be removed, and it can eat sh*t and piss on it's own then it is a human (disease and defects aside).

A fetus can't choose sh*t I don't see how it is relevant. Hell a 1 month old baby cannot really make any decisions.

Abortion is a good way of preventing a lot of pain and suffering.

Also it's not pro-life it is anti-choice. More to the point it is not for you or I to decide what someone else does with their body.

Whether you like it or not, that fetus through the course of nature will become a person.

"A fetus can't choose sht", what relevance does this have? My entire point of my post is that we need to protect those who are not yet born.

"Abortion is a good way of preventing a lot of pain and suffering" - so is walking through a hospital and shooting/lethally injecting patients, but we don't do it.

"It's not for you or I to decide what someone else does with their body" - tell that to law that bans marijuana, hemp, but profits off cigarettes and alcohol. Please go.

Society is full of stupid people looking for the easy way out. This theme replays itself throughout society. Keep on herpin and derpin though. Wonder what your thoughts would be on it from a 3rd person perspective had your parents aborted you. Isn't abort an odd term? Murder more like it. Justify it how you will, feeble minds.

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:21 PM
Sexism is discussing abortion without a thought for the pregnant woman, you moron. It's easy for you to say "oh just have the baby" when you forget that women DIE in labor all the goddamned time. You have no ****ing right to force any woman to undergo that against her will.

Sexism is making claims that I as a father have no say in this matter. It isn't just your kid it is mine too.

So, GTFO.

MyLastSerenade
08-27-2011, 08:22 PM
In case you're genuinely curious...

Situation 1: I throw away a piece of furniture that I don't want. everythingwentbetterthanexpected

Situation 2: Someone breaks into my house in the middle of the night, beats me with a baseball bat and steals my furniture. fuuuuuuuuu

Get it now? Voluntary vs. involuntary?


That's not the same, and what I am pointing out. The value isn't obviously the same in both scenarios, so which one is correct. either it's a child or isn't. Can't be both.

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:22 PM
Lol nice cop-out. Why are you extrapolating? We don't know. He could die before the age of 12 years old. How is what something WILL be relevant to what it is and how it should be treated morally? Again, you're assuming we should treat any life form the same according to your moral code.

It is pretty much obvious that, now that you realize you're just pushing a moral code on others, you'll resort to non-sensical statement like this one.

That's actually how it works bro. Now you know what you are killing.

flairon
08-27-2011, 08:23 PM
Actually you're avoiding the real underlying question:

Why is it not a safety concern for people to sleep around (with no money involved) and is a safety concern for people to sleep around (when money is involved).

You're demanding one from a business. You're not demanding one from a "hobby" or leisure activity. If I have a house and invite random people over to have sex with online and promote it -- I am not a prostitute because I am not getting paid but I am sleeping with a lot of people.

How is this different in the idea of safety.

Purposefully avoiding a question doesn't make you smart.

Pay attention. Sex trade workers literally sleep with 100's if not 1000's of people, it's the job. In the case of the porn industry, they are all tested regularly and licensed, the same for legalized prostitution. Thats the reason for the restriction/legislation.

The 'sluts' you think you know about dont. In reality most girls get the tag of 'slut' usually because some half retarded guy got her drunk and started passing it around to his boys that she's a 'slut' usually because he couldn't seal the deal, is afraid she's going to tell everyone he has a small dick, had a case of whiskeydick and couldn't pull it off....the list of reasons why guys do it is almost endless, and in this society any female that has had more than like 3 sex partners in her life is labled 'slut'. Guys are notorious for multiplying their sexual partners to impress their friends..in reality most males are statistically shown to have less than 10 in their lifetime. So your argument doesn't have solid ground to stand on, no matter how much hyperbole you try to shovel into it. This is the answer that i just tried to keep from having to spell out to you.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 08:24 PM
That's actually how it works bro. Now you know what you are killing.

No pushing views on others is not the way it works. Have fun eating your salad, now you know what you are killing. I hope you cringe and feel bad each time you swallow plants and herbs.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 08:24 PM
Sexism is making claims that I as a father have no say in this matter. It isn't just your kid it is mine too.

So, GTFO.

Who would have guessed that a sexist piece of **** like you thinks he OWNS the mother of the child he fathered. Tell you what, you can have a say in the right to choose abortion when it's YOUR body that carries the fetus.

PS interesting how this always turns out. As I've always said: People who are against abortion are against it because they hate, or at the very least do not respect and hold sexist attitudes toward, women. It's not about babies; it's about taking away women's rights.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 08:26 PM
That's not the same, and what I am pointing out. The value isn't obviously the same in both scenarios, so which one is correct. either it's a child or isn't. Can't be both.

Easy: it's not.

But that doesn't mean that you're allowed to take away or harm any part of my body for any reason.

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:27 PM
No pushing views on others is not the way it works. Have fun eating your salad, now you know what you are killing. I hope you cringe and feel bad each time you swallow plants and herbs.

C'mon now. They're dying so that I can buy a nicer car or a bigger house... I obviously can't give them to my rich vegetable-less neighbors.

MyLastSerenade
08-27-2011, 08:27 PM
Easy: it's not.

Then why is he given a life sentence?

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:27 PM
Who would have guessed that a sexist piece of **** like you thinks he OWNS the mother of the child he fathered. Tell you what, you can have a say in the right to choose abortion when it's YOUR body that carries the fetus.

PS interesting how this always turns out. As I've always said: People who are against abortion are against it because they hate, or at the very least do not respect and hold sexist attitudes toward, women. It's not about babies; it's about taking away women's rights.

Sexist people can't debate logically. :)

They like to think it is about them rather than about the unborn.

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:29 PM
Then why is he given a life sentence?

Good question.

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:30 PM
Pay attention. Sex trade workers literally sleep with 100's if not 1000's of people, it's the job. In the case of the porn industry, they are all tested regularly and licensed, the same for legalized prostitution. Thats the reason for the restriction/legislation.

The 'sluts' you think you know about dont. In reality most girls get the tag of 'slut' usually because some half retarded guy got her drunk and started passing it around to his boys that she's a 'slut' usually because he couldn't seal the deal, is afraid she's going to tell everyone he has a small dick, had a case of whiskeydick and couldn't pull it off....the list of reasons why guys do it is almost endless, and in this society any female that has had more than like 3 sex partners in her life is labled 'slut'. Guys are notorious for multiplying their sexual partners to impress their friends..in reality most males are statistically shown to have less than 10 in their lifetime. So your argument doesn't have solid ground to stand on, no matter how much hyperbole you try to shovel into it. This is the answer that i just tried to keep from having to spell out to you.

Pay attention: I just gave you a scenario where people sleep around and it isn't their job with 100's if not 1000's of people.

Answer the question.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 08:31 PM
Sexist people can't debate logically. :)

They like to think it is about them rather than about the unborn.

Again, I'm sure that's quite easy to say as someone who will never experience any of the following:

Pregnancy ComplicationsBacterial Vaginosis Bed Rest Bleeding During Pregnancy Blighted Ovum Cervical Cerclage Chicken Pox Cholestasis of Pregnancy Common Pregnancy Complications Concerns regarding Early Fetal Development Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Infection D&C procedure after a Miscarriage Ectopic Pregnancy Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders (FASD); Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS) & Fetal Alcohol Effects (FAE) Fetal Growth Restriction Gestational Diabetes Group B Strep Infection HELLP Syndrome High Amniotic Fluid Levels : Polyhydramnios HIV/AIDS during Pregnancy Hyperemesis Gravidarum Incompetent Cervix Intrauterine Growth Restriction (IUGR): Small for Gestational Age (SGA) Listeria Low Amniotic Fluid Levels : Oligohydramnios Miscarriage Molar Pregnancy Placenta Accreta Placenta Previa Placental Abruption Preeclampsia Pregnancy Induced Hypertension (PIH) RH Factor STD'S & STI'S During Pregnancy Tipped Uterus Toxoplasmosis Urinary Tract Infection Vanishing Twin Syndrome Yeast Infection

http://www.americanpregnancy.org/pregnancycomplications/

But it's not like you even pretend to care about women, so I guess in that sense you're at least consistent. (I do wonder how you'd feel about the mother of your child, aka your property whose life you dictate, developing any of the above.)

LastSerenade, I didn't write those laws and I don't support them. Inconsistent legal punishment for crimes does not abortion policy make.

flairon
08-27-2011, 08:34 PM
Pay attention: I just gave you a scenario where people sleep around and it isn't their job with 100's if not 1000's of people.

Answer the question.

The point is they dont. Why dont we create a scenario where they are ****ing 100's of partners on the back of a unicorn, it will be about as likely to happen if they arent in the regulated industries of porn or legalized prostitution.


with that..im done for the evening.

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:34 PM
ad hominem

Fixed. You're sexiest. GTFO.

Bsip
08-27-2011, 08:35 PM
And what's wrong with interfering with the "cycle of human life" as you put it, especially when that organic matter hasn't even developped a nervous system?

Because it should still be viewed as a human being. Once fertilization happens, that is the biological path it's set on. From fertilization, it's just a matter of cells continuing to divide...a process that continues to happen until death at any age.

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:36 PM
The point is they dont. Why dont we create a scenario where they are ****ing 100's of partners on the back of a unicorn, it will be about as likely to happen if they arent in the regulated industries of porn or legalized prostitution.


with that..im done for the evening.

LOL. :)

Have a good night. If you don't want to debate I suggest not espousing your views on this forum.

Tamorlane
08-27-2011, 08:37 PM
Again, I'm sure that's quite easy to say as someone who will never experience any of the following:

Pregnancy ComplicationsBacterial Vaginosis Bed Rest Bleeding During Pregnancy Blighted Ovum Cervical Cerclage Chicken Pox Cholestasis of Pregnancy Common Pregnancy Complications Concerns regarding Early Fetal Development Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Infection D&C procedure after a Miscarriage Ectopic Pregnancy Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders (FASD); Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS) & Fetal Alcohol Effects (FAE) Fetal Growth Restriction Gestational Diabetes Group B Strep Infection HELLP Syndrome High Amniotic Fluid Levels : Polyhydramnios HIV/AIDS during Pregnancy Hyperemesis Gravidarum Incompetent Cervix Intrauterine Growth Restriction (IUGR): Small for Gestational Age (SGA) Listeria Low Amniotic Fluid Levels : Oligohydramnios Miscarriage Molar Pregnancy Placenta Accreta Placenta Previa Placental Abruption Preeclampsia Pregnancy Induced Hypertension (PIH) RH Factor STD'S & STI'S During Pregnancy Tipped Uterus Toxoplasmosis Urinary Tract Infection Vanishing Twin Syndrome Yeast Infection

http://www.americanpregnancy.org/pregnancycomplications/

But it's not like you even pretend to care about women, so I guess in that sense you're at least consistent. (I do wonder how you'd feel about the mother of your child, aka your property whose life you dictate, developing any of the above.)

LastSerenade, I didn't write those laws and I don't support them. Inconsistent legal punishment for crimes does not abortion policy make.

Please shut the **** up about this bullsht with pregnancy complications. This is 2011, not 1412. Brb killing a life because of a potential complication.

brb talking about 'caring about women' but then disregard a life, woman, man, whatever. All because we are obsessed with liberalism and the 'right to do as we please'. Yet the same law tells us we can't smoke weed or we're demonized and charged criminally. Honestly just **** off. Not many people here even understand the depth of this concept. The arguments put forward are pathetic and embarrassing.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 08:41 PM
Fixed. You're sexiest. GTFO.

I'm impressed by how terrified you are of my argument. It's "sexiest" (why thanks) in your opinion to think that the unambiguously live, breathing woman deserves more rights than the fetus in her belly. No, you're sexist and you're a weasel too. I shudder to think that garbage like you might one day have the opportunity to abuse a woman with this ideology.

JamesMUSCLE
08-27-2011, 08:41 PM
nS6nguMTr38

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:45 PM
I'm impressed by how terrified you are of my argument. It's "sexiest" (why thanks) in your opinion to think that the unambiguously live, breathing woman deserves more rights than the fetus in her belly. No, you're sexist and you're a weasel too. I shudder to think that garbage like you might one day have the opportunity to abuse a woman with this ideology.

You're just mad that I called you on your bull****. It isn't my opinion. You are. This is a fact.

You think women deserve more rights as they now can stand as judge and jury to the unborn and slay them at their will without any regard to the unborn or their rights.

You're disgusting. I don't say that lightly and I rarely feel that way toward people on this forum. You truly are excrement. Hopefully one day you'll wake up and look outside of your shallow, pithy, and vain existence and realize there are others around you.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 08:46 PM
Please shut the **** up about this bullsht with pregnancy complications. This is 2011, not 1412. Brb killing a life because of a potential complication.

brb talking about 'caring about women' but then disregard a life, woman, man, whatever. All because we are obsessed with liberalism and the 'right to do as we please'. Yet the same law tells us we can't smoke weed or we're demonized and charged criminally. Honestly just **** off. Not many people here even understand the depth of this concept. The arguments put forward are pathetic and embarrassing.

Oh, go **** yourself.

Fetuses ARE NOT PEOPLE. They DO NOT HAVE RIGHTS.

Women ARE PEOPLE. They DO HAVE RIGHTS.

Get this through your ****ing misogynistic skulls.

What's pathetic and embarrassing is that you think that no women die or are hurt during pregnancy and childbirth anymore, you incompetent baboon. I can't tell if you're in denial and refuse to believe that women really do suffer, or if you simply don't care and think that women don't deserve the right to choose whether or not to take that risk because they're sluts and whores.

This is what the "abortion debate" is all about for you scumbags: Hurting women. Controlling women. It's evil and it's disgusting.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 08:50 PM
You're just mad that I called you on your bull****. It isn't my opinion. You are. This is a fact.

You think women deserve more rights as they now can stand as judge and jury to the unborn and slay them at their will without any regard to the unborn or their rights.

You're disgusting. I don't say that lightly and I rarely feel that way toward people on this forum. You truly are excrement. Hopefully one day you'll wake up and look outside of your shallow, pithy, and vain existence and realize there are others around you.

You aren't entitled to your own facts, piece of ****.

You want to talk about someone who is literally excrement? How about the little boy who thinks that because he impregnates a woman, he owns her and can force her to give birth against her will? Wait, no, that's just what you're entitled to because you were born with a penis.

The unborn HAVE NO RIGHTS. Women, however, do. I realize that that really upsets you, and you'd be much happier if women were just docile little man-servants but that's unfortunately not the way of the world and you're going to have to learn to accept that.

Or maybe you'll follow in the footsteps of a guy who had similar ideas to you, who felt that he was entitled to the women around him by virtue of the fact that he was a man...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Collier_Township_shooting

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:50 PM
ITT: Lexinak would have late term abortions even up to 11 months because it is her right. **** that fetus.

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:52 PM
zip

Mm-hmm. I'm sure you will love aborting your children.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 08:52 PM
ITT: Lexinak would have late term abortions even up to 11 months because it is her right. **** that fetus.

ITT: Woman-hating tk217 makes up bull**** to distract from his own disgusting ideology. **** those slutty women.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 08:52 PM
Mm-hmm. I'm sure you will love aborting your children.

I'll get pregnant and abort on the latest possible day just to spite you. Hey, since this is an anonymous forum for all you know it could be your "baby" I "kill."

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:53 PM
ITT: Woman-hating tk217 makes up bull**** to distract from his own disgusting ideology. **** those slutty women.
Yes, because I am the one suggesting, education, medication, and prevention.

I'm such a bad person.

tk217
08-27-2011, 08:54 PM
I'll get pregnant and abort on the latest possible day just to spite you. Hey, since this is an anonymous forum for all you know it could be your "baby" I "kill."

Oh wow... such a sad person.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 08:55 PM
Yes, because I am the one suggesting, education, medication, and prevention.

I'm such a bad person.

You're the one demanding forced birth. That's why you're a bad person. You think that you have the right to tell a pregnant woman which medical procedures she is and isn't allowed to have, based on your own ignorant judgment.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 08:59 PM
Let's review, kiddos.

Anti-choice position: Pregnant women are sluts because they had sex. Therefore, we should not allow pregnant women to abort their pregnancies because they must be punished for being sluts. If pregnant women get sick, injured or killed throughout the course of pregnancy or childbirth, that is AWESOME. Except it never happens. EVER. The hundreds of thousands of women who die every year in childbirth don't actually exist. And that's what they get for having sex without my permission, anyway.

Pro-choice position: Keep your laws off my body. I know what's best for my life, not you. If you don't have a uterus, shut your ****ing mouth.

tk217
08-27-2011, 09:00 PM
You're the one demanding forced birth. That's why you're a bad person. You think that you have the right to tell a pregnant woman which medical procedures she is and isn't allowed to have, based on your own ignorant judgment.

/headtilt

Forced birth? That's a new one.

I actually don't care how you "give birth" if you get take the zygote out and "give birth" to it in a tube that'd be fine -- if it were scientifically possible, heck even putting it inside another person willing to give birth if that were an option.

Not sure why I'm the ignorant one lacking judgment when there are options out there to prevent this from ever coming up and you're the one getting a bun in the oven.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 09:07 PM
/headtilt

Forced birth? That's a new one.

I actually don't care how you "give birth" if you get take the zygote out and "give birth" to it in a tube that'd be fine -- if it were scientifically possible, heck even putting it inside another person willing to give birth if that were an option.

Not sure why I'm the ignorant one lacking judgment when there are options out there to prevent this from ever coming up and you're the one getting a bun in the oven.

It's not scientifically possible, and it's not an option. So your generous concessions mean exactly nothing.

You're the ignorant one lacking judgment if you seem to think that all pregnancies are preventable if people would just use birth control. Because everyone knows exactly how birth control works, can access it, can use it properly or negotiate for their partner to use it properly, and only has consensual sex. What the **** alternate reality are you living in?

ETA: This is only about me in the sense that your disrespect for women manifests as disrespect for me. I'm doing just fine not having children, myself - but plenty of women who can't get birth control, don't know how to use it or have partners (or rapists) who won't use it are having a bit more trouble, and those women especially don't deserve to have your dumbass judgment passed upon them forcing a child into their lives.

WMcEnaney
08-27-2011, 09:08 PM
Giving birth is a parental decision, first and foremost. Especially at early stages, it's just a part of the woman's body.
Sorry, PHC, I doubt it. If the baby were part of the mother's body, the infant's DNA would be the mother's DNA. But since the mother's husband isn't his wife's father, you won't find any of his genes in her cells. If the infant were part of the mother's body, the mother would, eventually, have four arms and four legs: the ones she was born with and the ones that are or will be on the baby's body.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 09:11 PM
Sorry, PHC, I doubt it. If the baby were part of the mother's body, the infant's DNA would be the mother's DNA. But since the mother's husband isn't his wife's father, you won't find any of his genes in her cells. If the infant were part of the mother's body, the mother would, eventually, have four arms and four legs: the ones she was born with and the ones that are or will be on the baby's body.

The mitochondria in your cells have distinct DNA. That doesn't mean they're special or deserving of the right to take over your body.

And regardless of the DNA of the fetus, it's still taking up residency without consent in the pregnant woman's body. Or is it OK for me to climb on your back and literally suck the food and oxygen out of your body for my own use for 9 months?

tk217
08-27-2011, 09:12 PM
It's not scientifically possible, and it's not an option. So your generous concessions mean exactly nothing.

You're the ignorant one lacking judgment if you seem to think that all pregnancies are preventable if people would just use birth control. Because everyone knows exactly how birth control works, can access it, can use it properly or negotiate for their partner to use it properly, and only has consensual sex. What the **** alternate reality are you living in?

ETA: This is only about me in the sense that your disrespect for women manifests as disrespect for me. I'm doing just fine not having children, myself - but plenty of women who can't get birth control, don't know how to use it or have partners (or rapists) who won't use it are having a bit more trouble, and those women especially don't deserve to have your dumbass judgment passed upon them forcing a child into their lives.

You keep talking and I keep laughing at you.

Try putting it in the back or in your mouth if you fear birth control can't work then. There are alternatives to missionary too. I know crazy. Wait condoms exist? Dental dams exist too? You can use those in combination? Wait there is a thing called spermacide? You can get you tubes tied? He can get his tubes tied? Wow crazy. So many things exist to prevent this --- but you, Lex, can't be expected to do that.... you're young... and the sun is out there, and your future soul mate exists. Plus you can always do that later. You've got time. And heck, who cares about fetuses anyway? They're not alive or anything. They're like you know... skin cells. Rationalize it all away. That jacket made of leather wasn't a sheep... and that hamburger you just ate wasn't a cow either. It is just a jacket and that is hamburger.

tk217
08-27-2011, 09:14 PM
The mitochondria in your cells have distinct DNA. That doesn't mean they're special or deserving of the right to take over your body.

And regardless of the DNA of the fetus, it's still taking up residency without consent in the pregnant woman's body. Or is it OK for me to climb on your back and literally suck the food and oxygen out of your body for my own use for 9 months?

Wow you're dumb.

That is his own cell. It is part of him. That zygote isn't just you.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 09:17 PM
You keep talking and I keep laughing at you.

Try putting it in the back or in your mouth if you fear birth control can't work then. There are alternatives to missionary too. I know crazy. Wait condoms exist? Dental dams exist too? You can use those in combination? Wait there is a thing called spermacide? You can get you tubes tied? He can get his tubes tied? Wow crazy. So many things exist to prevent this --- but you, Lex, can't be expected to do that.... you're young... and the sun is out there, and your future soul mate exists. Plus you can always do that later. You've got time. And heck, who cares about fetuses anyway? They're not alive or anything. They're like you know... skin cells. Rationalize it all away. That jacket made of leather wasn't a sheep... and that hamburger you just ate wasn't a cow either. It is just a jacket and that is hamburger.

You really refuse to think outside your own privileged life, don't you? I point out that people often don't have access or education or negotiating power and you come back with "well just drop several thousand dollars on sterilization surgery!"

Seriously?

tk217
08-27-2011, 09:19 PM
You really refuse to think outside your own privileged life, don't you?

You're just sexist, ignorant, and vain.

Have fun aborting your children.

lexinak
08-27-2011, 09:22 PM
You're just sexist who is ignorant and vain.

Have fun aborting your children.

Ah, yes. I'm the sexist because I care about the actual pregnant woman, whereas you are an egalitarian dream because you think you're entitled to dictate pregnant women's medical decisions.

Why do you keep coming back to "have fun aborting your children"? Do you think it's funny, or hurtful? To me it sounds like you've got nothing else besides "My opinion is more important than your bodily integrity" and you're kind of out of ideas.

Do please tell me exactly what it is that makes me "ignorant and vain" though. Does it have something to do with the fact that for all your posturing and chest-puffing and demanding and asserting, you will never have the ability to get pregnant and make the decision to keep or abort for yourself? The best you can do is abusing your intimate partner, and that somehow upsets you, doesn't it?

tk217
08-27-2011, 09:23 PM
Ah, yes. I'm the sexist because I care about the actual pregnant woman, whereas you are an egalitarian dream because you think you're entitled to dictate pregnant women's medical decisions.

Why do you keep coming back to "have fun aborting your children"? Do you think it's funny, or hurtful? To me it sounds like you've got nothing else besides "My opinion is more important than your bodily integrity" and you're kind of out of ideas.

Do please tell me exactly what it is that makes me "ignorant and vain" though. Does it have something to do with the fact that for all your posturing and chest-puffing and demanding and asserting, you will never have the ability to get pregnant and make the decision to keep or abort for yourself? The best you can do is abusing your intimate partner, and that somehow upsets you, doesn't it?

You don't care that is just it. You just want to be able to execute the unborn. That is it.

Something tells me you're one of the overbearing women who is a control freak.

WMcEnaney
08-27-2011, 09:25 PM
The mitochondria in your cells have distinct DNA. That doesn't mean they're special or deserving of the right to take over your body.

And regardless of the DNA of the fetus, it's still taking up residency without consent in the pregnant woman's body. Or is it OK for me to climb on your back and literally suck the food and oxygen out of your body for my own use for 9 months?
The baby is innocent. Remember, he didn't climb into his mother's womb. He's there because his dad's sperm fertilized his mother's egg. Say the human organism in the womb is a human person. Now suppose that the baby's parents conceived him during rape, incest, or both. Then abortion is like executing an innocent person for another person's crime. I impregnate a woman when I rape her, she gets an abortion, and the baby dies for my crime? The mother's body is hers, the baby's body is his, and both human beings have a right to life. If a mother dies deliberately for her child, she agrees to do die for him. The baby never gets a chance to agree to die for anyone or anything. A prisoner who gets the death penalty because he deserves it has forfeited his right to life. No baby has ever forfeited that baby's right to life. If someone kills the baby, the killer violates that right.

Many people say that they have obligations because they have rights. It's the other way around. Their obligations help give them their rights. If I have children, my obligation to feed, clothe, shelter, and love them, gives me the right to do those things. Normally, obligations precede rights. The baby in the womb has a natural right to life. But he's too young to fulfill an obligation. His natural right to life is a God-given right that his mother is obligated to respect.

tk217
08-27-2011, 09:27 PM
The baby is innocent. Remember, he didn't climb into his mother's womb. He's there because his dad's sperm fertilized his mother's egg. Say the human organism in the womb is a human person. Now suppose that the baby's parents conceived him during rape, incest, or both. Then abortion is like executing an innocent person for another person's crime. I impregnate a woman when I rape her,m she gets an abortion, and the baby dies for my crime? The mother's body is hers, the baby's body is his, and both human beings have a right to life.

She will just say.... the zygote is part of her and it is like clipping her fingernails. A fetus after all is just skin cells or something.... herpaderp.

Rationalizing the idea of vacuuming a defenseless child up into a meat grinder.

WMcEnaney
08-27-2011, 09:54 PM
She will just say.... the zygote is part of her and it is like clipping her fingernails. A fetus after all is just skin cells or something.... herpaderp.

Rationalizing the idea of vacuuming a defenseless child up into a meat grinder.
A DNA test would prove that the fingernail was hers. But no DNA test could prove that the baby's DNA was the DNA his mother has in each cell of her body. By aborting a baby, the doctor removes parts from the mother's body, but they're parts of someone else's body, not of hers. Before the baby's conception, not one of his body parts was in his mother. He began to exist when his father's sperm fertilized his mother's egg.

Bsip
08-27-2011, 10:11 PM
From the moment of conception, the fertilized egg begins the process of cell division with cells of a unique genetic code - the same process that will continue from the very first second, until death at any age. Therefore, fertilization is the point at which an identical human life begins to develop.


/THREAD

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 10:12 PM
C'mon now. They're dying so that I can buy a nicer car or a bigger house... I obviously can't give them to my rich vegetable-less neighbors.


Sexist people can't debate logically. :)

They like to think it is about them rather than about the unborn.

LOL! I owned you and you're still in here. Why are you pushing your moral views on others? How is it fair for you to draw the line at "the second sperm and egg meets and creat a life form" and that I can't draw it at "as soon as the fetus develops a nervous system", or "as long as it's attached to the mothers's body"?


Because it should still be viewed as a human being. Once fertilization happens, that is the biological path it's set on. From fertilization, it's just a matter of cells continuing to divide...a process that continues to happen until death at any age.

Oh really? Why? Why should it be viewed the same as a 10 years old kid? That's nothing but assumptions that your moral code is the best one and the only one out there.


A DNA test would prove that the fingernail was hers. But no DNA test could prove that the baby's DNA was the DNA his mother has in each cell of her body. By aborting a baby, the doctor removes parts from the mother's body, but they're parts of someone else's body, not of hers. Before the baby's conception, not one of his body parts was in his mother. He began to exist when his father's sperm fertilized his mother's egg.

Why should we treat morally the same a week old fetus and a 10 years old kid while there are great biological differences?

Bsip
08-27-2011, 10:18 PM
Oh really? Why? Why should it be viewed the same as a 10 years old kid? That's nothing but assumptions that your moral code is the best one and the only one out there.




Why should we treat morally the same a week old fetus and a 10 years old kid while there are great biological differences?

There are great biological differences between a 10 year old and 20 year old. Who gives a ****. They're still human beings with unique genetic code.

WMcEnaney
08-27-2011, 10:21 PM
She will just say.... the zygote is part of her and it is like clipping her fingernails. A fetus after all is just skin cells or something.... herpaderp.

Rationalizing the idea of vacuuming a defenseless child up into a meat grinder.
She can't rationalize partial-birth abortion. For the doctor to partial-birth-abort a baby, he first needs to deliver the baby's head or part of it. After the baby's death, the rest of the corpse needs to come out. Why don't deliver the baby, not the corpse, and put him up for adoption?

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 10:23 PM
There are great biological differences between a 10 year old and 20 year old. Who gives a ****. They're still human beings with unique genetic code.

Yes biological differences, like not having a fully developped nervous system and not being a sentient being, between a week old mass of cells and a 10 years old kid is totally analogous to the differences between a 10 years old and a 20 years old, pls go.

Why is a "unique genetic code" that sacred? Who cares? How is that relevant? How does that justify you pushing your moral views on a woman.

tk217
08-27-2011, 10:31 PM
LOL! I owned you and you're still in here. Why are you pushing your moral views on others? How is it fair for you to draw the line at "the second sperm and egg meets and creat a life form" and that I can't draw it at "as soon as the fetus develops a nervous system", or "as long as it's attached to the mothers's body"?

Age: 18

Still doesn't get it.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 10:33 PM
Age: 18

Still doesn't get it.

Age: irrelevant

Status: still using sophisms and logical fallacies to push his moral views onto others.. after being shown that he's just drawing an arbitrary line at a mass of cells not capable of feeling anything nor being conscious.

Bsip
08-27-2011, 10:40 PM
Yes biological differences, like not having a fully developped nervous system and not being a sentient being, between a week old mass of cells and a 10 years old kid is totally analogous to the differences between a 10 years old and a 20 years old, pls go.

Why is a "unique genetic code" that sacred? Who cares? How is that relevant? How does that justify you pushing your moral views on a woman.

A unique genetic code is the basis by which individual life is distinguished. It's a definite indicator that says "this is a human being." That's not pushing my moral views on someone, that's fuking science.

If anyone is pushing moral views, it's someone like you who's trying to draw a line past the point where a life is created and saying that it's right to kill a another human being until a certain period in it's development.

WMcEnaney
08-27-2011, 10:42 PM
There are great biological differences between a 10 year old and 20 year old. Who gives a ****. They're still human beings with unique genetic code.
Good point. Think about the idea that it's all right to abort until the human being in the womb can live outside that. When that human being can live there depends on technology. Someday scientists may discover a way gestate baby'a outside the womb for all nine months. Viability could begin at conception.

Functionalist definitions of personhood have immoral implications. An ethics professor told me that a human being's personhood depended on his brain development. The professor even thought that, if a living, breathing, adult human being's brain hadn't developed enough, that human being wasn't a human person. Maybe a eugenicist would want to kill that human being to prevent him from "polluting the gene pool?" What if a brain injury takes away the abilities that I have because my brain has developed sufficiently to make me a person? After the injury, am I a nonperson?

Say my brain hasn't developed "far" enough to make me a human person. If someone shoots me, will a doctor need to CAT scan my brain to find out whether the killer murdered me? Maybe some sick serial killer will shoot me, remove my brain, and incinerates it. Maybe nobody will be able to tell whether he murdered me. What if he destroys the brain of each human being he kills, what if each the rest of each victim's body developed much, much faster than his brain did? Maybe the a jury will need to find the killer not guilty because nobody can test any victim's now nonexistent for its degree of development?

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 10:44 PM
A unique genetic code is the basis by which individual life is distinguished. It's a definite indicator that says "this is a human being." That's not pushing my moral views on someone, that's fuking science.

If anyone is pushing moral views, it's someone like you who's trying to draw a line past the point where a life is created and saying that it's right to kill a another being until a certain point in it's development.

So I guess you are a vegan? Are you trying to push that onto everyone else around too?

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 10:46 PM
Good point. Think about the idea that it's all right to abort until the human being in the womb can live outside that. When that human being can live there depends on technology. Someday scientists may discover a way gestate baby'a outside the womb for all nine months. Viability could begin at conception.

Functionalist definitions of personhood have immoral implications. An ethics professor told me that a human being's personhood depended on his brain development. The professor even thought that, if a living, breathing, adult human being's brain hadn't developed enough, that human being wasn't a human person. Maybe a eugenicist would want to kill that human being to prevent him from "polluting the gene pool?" What if a brain injury takes away the abilities that I have because my brain has developed sufficiently to make me a person? After the injury, am I a nonperson?

How is that relevant? Based on which reasons are you against abortion; against delivering unprepared parents from the burden of giving birth?

Bsip
08-27-2011, 10:49 PM
So I guess you are a vegan? Are you trying to push that onto everyone else around too?

*human* being

Way to sidestep the argument

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 10:59 PM
*human* being

Way to sidestep the argument

Oh, so now you drew another line at "human dna". How convenient ... :rolleyes:

There is no sidestepping, you've just admitted your hypocrisy in being okay with ending a life form but not another, even though the former has greater feelings and is more conscious than the latter. Plus, this is without taking into consideration the two entire lives (parents' one) that will be phucked up because you decided your moral code was better for them than theirs.

Your point of view is just an incoherent rumbling based on subjective and unjustified premises.

tk217
08-27-2011, 11:00 PM
Age: irrelevant

Status: still using sophisms and logical fallacies to push his moral views onto others.. after being shown that he's just drawing an arbitrary line at a mass of cells not capable of feeling anything nor being conscious.

You still don't understand the word arbitrary apparently -- and you're the one drawing that line. Not me.

You're the same organism you were as a zygote as far as DNA is concerned.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 11:06 PM
You still don't understand the word arbitrary apparently -- and you're the one drawing that line. Not me.

You're the same organism you were as a zygote as far as DNA is concerned.

Okay, point? My hair has my DNA too, I still shave, cut my hair and trim. How is what something WILL be relevant to what it is?

Arbitrary: . Based on or subject to individual judgment or preference:

Here it is. Now what?

tk217
08-27-2011, 11:09 PM
Okay, point? My hair has my DNA too, I still shave, cut my hair and trim. How is what something WILL be relevant to what it is?

Arbitrary: . Based on or subject to individual judgment or preference:

Here it is. Now what?

Are you just obfuscating now because you lack an argument?

brb discussing cutting my hair like that has something to do with abortion or even what it is to be human.

Stuffnblue
08-27-2011, 11:15 PM
There's a lot of waste on the pro-choice side. They spend so many resources trying to get it outlawed. If they redirected all of that effort to reducing the number of abortions (by choice of the mother) instead of fighting it legally there would no doubt be many fewer abortions performed.

Problem is they have a nasty conflict that won't allow them to do it. They hate anything that resembles welfare or social safety nets so they just shoot themselves in the foot over and over. You could vastly reduce the number of abortions if you gave mothers fantastic alternatives. The christian right has access to plenty of money to get it done.

tk217
08-27-2011, 11:17 PM
There's a lot of waste on the pro-choice side. They spend so many resources trying to get it outlawed. If they redirected all of that effort to reducing the number of abortions (by choice of the mother) instead of fighting it legally there would no doubt be many fewer abortions performed.

Problem is they have a nasty conflict that won't allow them to do it. They hate anything that resembles welfare or social safety nets so they just shoot themselves in the foot over and over. You could vastly reduce the number of abortions if you gave mothers fantastic alternatives. The christian right has access to plenty of money to get it done.

I am assuming you mean pro-life.

And, I totally agree. Education, medication, and prevention are easily better options.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 11:19 PM
Are you just obfuscating now because you lack an argument?

brb discussing cutting my hair like that has something to do with abortion or even what it is to be human.

The dude (or you?) was arguing that because it has a unique DNA, it was scared and shouldn't be touched. THAT is an arbitrary line, especially considering the fact that an embryo is merely conscious, has yet to develop a nervous system and hasn't "experienced" life yet.




There's a lot of waste on the pro-choice side. They spend so many resources trying to get it outlawed. If they redirected all of that effort to reducing the number of abortions (by choice of the mother) instead of fighting it legally there would no doubt be many fewer abortions performed.

Problem is they have a nasty conflict that won't allow them to do it. They hate anything that resembles welfare or social safety nets so they just shoot themselves in the foot over and over. You could vastly reduce the number of abortions if you gave mothers fantastic alternatives. The christian right has access to plenty of money to get it done.

Two wrongs does not make one right. The fact that more effort should be put here and there doesn't take away the fact that deciding what parents do with their mass of cells IS pushing your moral codes onto others.

EDIT: Maybe you meant pro-life?

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 11:23 PM
I am assuming you mean pro-life.

And, I totally agree. Education, medication, and prevention are easily better options.

Yup but guess what, once a woman is impregnated, abortion is an option. It's up to them to choose.

tk217
08-27-2011, 11:25 PM
The dude (or you?) was arguing that because it has a unique DNA, it was scared and shouldn't be touched. THAT is an arbitrary line, especially considering the fact that an embryo is merely conscious, has yet to develop a nervous system and hasn't "experienced" life yet.

Actually most people who understand science argue this. I have no idea why the nervous system argument even exists. What grounds are these?

tk217
08-27-2011, 11:28 PM
Yup but guess what, once a woman is impregnated, abortion is an option. It's up to them to choose.

Why do they get to play executioner to another human life form?

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 11:32 PM
Actually most people who understand science argue this. I have no idea why the nervous system argument even exists. What grounds are these?

Appeal to authority? How is them being scientists any relevant to this moral issue? The grounds are that if a nervous system is not developped, that thing called embryo can't experience life.


Why do they get to play executioner to another human life form?

Because I don't wanna phuck up my life with an unprepared child? Duh?


By your radical stance, I hope you don't use anything derived from animals and made a great research to come up with the most vegan diet possible.

tk217
08-27-2011, 11:33 PM
Appeal to authority? How is them being scientists any relevant to this moral issue? The grounds are that if a nervous system is not developped, that thing called embryo can't experience life.



Because I don't wanna phuck up my life with an unprepared child? Duh?

It isn't a moral issue - it is a matter of fact. That is when life begins. We went over this already. It can't experience life? What does that even mean?

Not an answer.

By your radical stance I hope you never become a judge.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 11:38 PM
It isn't a moral issue - it is a matter of fact. That is when life begins. We went over this already. It can't experience life? What does that even mean?

Not an answer.

By your radical stance I hope you never become a judge.

Yes I acknowledge that it's when a life form is formed, now what? Your arbitrary line is drawn at "as soon as a life form is formed" how is that not YOUR own moral code.

It can't experience life means it's not fully conscious yet and feelings are very limited. Basically, in the early stages of pregnancy, it's nothing more than a bunch of cells that will become a baby IF you decide to let them grow, but that's not relevant since it's not a sentient being yet.

tk217
08-27-2011, 11:47 PM
Yes I acknowledge that it's when a life form is formed, now what? Your arbitrary line is drawn at "as soon as a life form is formed" how is that not YOUR own moral code.

It can't experience life means it's not fully conscious yet and feelings are very limited. Basically, in the early stages of pregnancy, it's nothing more than a bunch of cells that will become a baby IF you decide to let them grow, but that's not relevant since it's not a sentient being yet.

In other words totally arbitrary and your own moral code that is completely baseless based on an imaginary concept of "experiencing life."

It isn't my moral code because that is a fact.

Please define "experiencing life."

So the basis of sentient life is what makes it alive. Can you explain sentience?

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 11:51 PM
In other words totally arbitrary and your own moral code that is completely baseless based on an imaginary concept of "experiencing life."

It isn't my moral code because that is a fact.

Please define "experiencing life."

So the basis of sentient life is what makes it alive. Can you explain sentience?

Before we go further, I am aware this is MY moral code, that is why I won't try to push it onto others who'll be in that situation. I think that as soon as the fetus becomes somewhat conscious, and I'd have to study more the different stages of pregnancy because I'm not knowledgable in this, it becomes a touchy subject; there is no way a couple shouldn't be allowed to abort a week old embryo though, that is utter non-sense. It's like saying I'm evil because I'm ripping a flower of the ground to give it to my gf.

WMcEnaney
08-27-2011, 11:52 PM
How is that relevant? Based on which reasons are you against abortion; against delivering unprepared parents from the burden of giving birth?
If a human being's personhood begins at conception, abortion is always murder.

tk217
08-27-2011, 11:55 PM
Before we go further, I am aware this is MY moral code, that is why I won't try to push it onto others who'll be in that situation. I think that as soon as the fetus becomes somewhat conscious, and I'd have to study more the different stages of pregnancy because I'm not knowledgable in this, it becomes a touchy subject; there is no way a couple shouldn't be allowed to abort a week old embryo though, that is utter non-sense. It's like saying I'm evil because I'm ripping a flower of the ground to give it to my gf.

Ah, but you are. You're pushing it on me. You are a hypocrite now.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 11:57 PM
If a human being's personhood begins at conception, abortion is always murder.

Nah murder is unlawfull killing.

Personhood: The state or condition of being a person, especially having those qualities that confer distinct individuality

This is a very subjective and vague definition. What is unlawful/lawful ensues generally from what is moral or immoral, and you thinking it's immoral because you give a sacred value to any form of life, even those who can't feel or aren't conscious, doesn't give you the right to push this view on unprepared parents.

Posthardcore
08-27-2011, 11:58 PM
Ah, but you are. You're pushing it on me. You are a hypocrite now.

I am not brah, if you get to impregnate your girlfriend unpurposely, you'll do whatever you feel like doing.

tk217
08-27-2011, 11:58 PM
I am not brah, if you get to impregnate your girlfriend unpurposely, you'll do whatever you feel like doing.

But when you go around killing other people (aborting them) you're pushing your moral code on them and on society.

Posthardcore
08-28-2011, 12:02 AM
But when you go around killing other people (aborting them) you're pushing your moral code on them and on society.

That killing is not much a killing as it is just preventing that bunch of cells to experience life. I'm not pushing any morals on anyone as the early stages of pregnancy, the embryo is as conscious as my beard.

Btw, it's not like I am around "killing" "people" (lol at people), each parent is responsible for his own embryo.

tk217
08-28-2011, 12:03 AM
That killing is not much a killing as it is just preventing that bunch of cells to experience life. I'm not pushing any morals on anyone as the early stages of pregnancy, the embryo is as conscious as my beard.

Rationalization, arbitrary justification.

You are killing human life that has potential.

So, you're saying that if you yourself don't commit the act -- but you watch it happen and do nothing it isn't your problem? Interesting.

Posthardcore
08-28-2011, 12:07 AM
Rationalization, arbitrary justification.

You are killing human life that has potential.

Okay? On what grounds does your argument stand? How is the potential necessarly relevant? That human life doesn't even know it is a human life; heck, it doesn't even know it's gonna exist or if it's gonna feel anything. It's not even conscious. Yes it's human life, no it's not a sentient being.

I'm rationalizing because that's what normal, rational people do. You seem to think we should all hold a one week embryo who's not even conscious as valuable as a fully grown kid, which, imo, is retarded; let alone trying to push that moral code on society.

WMcEnaney
08-28-2011, 12:10 AM
Nah murder is unlawfull killing.

Personhood: The state or condition of being a person, especially having those qualities that confer distinct individuality

This is a very subjective and vague definition. What is unlawful/lawful ensues generally from what is moral or immoral, and you thinking it's immoral because you give a sacred value to any form of life, even those who can't feel or aren't conscious, doesn't give you the right to push this view on unprepared parents.
PHC, let's say you and many other people were born, grew up, lived and died before there were any laws and before there were any government. Everyone you know is a perfectly healthy, living, breathing human being with a normal, perfectly healthy human brain. Do you think that if another human being knowingly, willingly, and freely kills his next-door neighbor for fun, he hasn't murdered him, since there's no legal definition of murder? If you doubt that it's murder, does the killer deserve any blame for the killing? The law doesn't give any human being his humanness. Legal definitions of personhood should depend on the nature of personhood. It does not depend on any court's definition. If there were never any people, there would be no courts, no laws, and no definitions of personhood. Law assumes that there is such a thing as personhood. No human person ever could invent human personhood as such. If it didn't exist, the "inventor" wouldn't be a person. What if some court's definition of personhood implies that your best friend is a nonperson? Are you going to agree with the definition? You probably won't conclude that your buddy was, say, a zombie or a furless gorilla.