Abortion - Page 7 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

dc_dux · 08-31-2007, 02:36 PM

And I wouldnt accept "unborn child" as a proper characterization.

Which is why we're still at zero.

BTW, I think abortion is wrong in many instances and I would counsel a woman against it, but I wont force my morals on others who bear the burden (no pun intended) of making that most difficult moral choice.

Infinite_Loser · 08-31-2007, 02:37 PM

I'm pretty sure I've said this three times now but... Women should be held to the same standards that men are when it comes to parenthood. You make it, you take care of it. Simple

Quote:

Originally Posted by tecoyah

So....back to the male perspective of domination over every situation. Ever think about what this means to the women that must carry a child?

Don't have sex if you're not willing to suffer the consequences. We, as men, have to abide by this code so why not women? What do you think would happen if a man tried to argue that he's mentally unprepared to raise a child? He'd be laughed at and ridiculed. Yet, if a women says it, then suddenly it's an acceptable reason to forego parenthood?

Surely you see something wrong with that situation.

dc_dux · 08-31-2007, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Infinite_Loser

I'm pretty sure I've said this three times now but... Women should be held to the same standards that men are when it comes to parenthood. You make it, you take care of it. Simple

Lets start with pay equity for woman and perhaps some women may take the issue of affordability of having a child out of the equation in making that moral decision. Simple

Infinite_Loser · 08-31-2007, 02:43 PM

So you're saying that it's easier to raise a child as a man than it is as a woman because you'll make more? Really, I can't begin to tell you how faulty such an assumption is.

Regardless of how much you make (Or don't make), one should be responsible for his/her actions. You're not ready to be a parent? Then either buy protection or don't have sex. It's not a hard concept to understand and I'll continue to repeat it for as long as it takes.

A woman shouldn't be able to shun her parental duties simply because she's a woman. Like I said, I'll agree with abortion when men don't have to pay child support. Of course, most of the abortion rights activists will argue that giving men the option to not pay child support would increase reckless behavior. Of course, said people also ignore the fact that a good chunk of people who've had an abortion done also had one or more in the past.

...Oh well for that whole 'reckless behavior' crap.

dc_dux · 08-31-2007, 02:45 PM

And yet you still havent explained why your moral position on when life begins (when there is no medical consensus) should be imposed on others.

Willravel · 08-31-2007, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tecoyah

So....back to the male perspective of domination over every situation. Ever think about what this means to the women that must carry a child?

She had sex, too. The man wasn't the only party being irresponsible (except in .03%, of course).

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

And I wouldnt accept "unborn child" as a proper characterization.

Which is why we're still at zero.

Pre-born human life form?
Early developing person?
Dennis Franz?

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

BTW, I think abortion is wrong in many instances and I would counsel a woman against it, but I wont force my morals on others who bear the burden (no pun intended) of making that most difficult moral choice.

The law is society forcing people to make the moral choice.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DC

Lets start with pay equity for woman and perhaps some women may take the issue of affordability of having a child out of the equation in making that moral decision. Simple

You got it. I'd support that 1000%.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DC

And yet you still havent explained why your moral position on when life begins (when there is no medical consensus) should be imposed on others.

It's reasonable to me. I still see the real imposition as that of the mother on the *as yet to be named preborn*. That's the imposition.

dc_dux · 08-31-2007, 02:51 PM

will...do you think the morning after pill is taking the life of a "yet to be named preborn"?

Infinite_Loser · 08-31-2007, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

And yet you still havent explained why your moral position on when life begins (when there is no medical consensus) should be imposed on others.

Simply because there is no 'medical consensus' doesn't mean that people should be able to do what they want willy nilly. I mean, I'd LOVE for that position to be applied elsewhere in life. I'd be a very happy person indeed

A woman isn't 100% responsible for making a child and she isn't just dealing with 'her body', so she shouldn't get absolute say.

dc_dux · 08-31-2007, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Infinite_Loser

Simply because there is no 'medical consensus' doesn't mean that people should be able to do what they want willy nilly. I mean, I'd LOVE for that position to be applied elsewhere in life. I'd be a very happy person indeed

ahhhh...."elsewhere in life"

You see thats the difference. There is consensus on "life" outside the womb.

Infinite_Loser · 08-31-2007, 02:57 PM

Nice way to twist around what I was saying

.

The point I was making is that 'No consensus' =/= 'Right'. You still haven't explained to me why women shouldn't have to be responsible for the choices they make.

dc_dux · 08-31-2007, 02:58 PM

There was no twist.

It still comes down to the core issue of when life begins.

Willravel · 08-31-2007, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

will...do you think the morning after pill is taking the life of a "yet to be named preborn"?

It prevents the egg from even sticking to the wall. That means within the 6 or so days it takes for fertilization to take, the thing just slips right out. No reproduction has occurred. I don't think it makes sense to go back too far, otherwise masturbation would be abortion.

Ustwo · 08-31-2007, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg700

If you think abortion is wrong, then don't have one.

Also, if you are willing to force a woman to have a child, you should be first in line to adopt that baby once it is born.

This logic applies to a TV show you don't like, but not to life.

IF you think that human life starts at conception then abortion is in fact murder at any time. You wouldn't tolerate people killing each other in the supermarket anymore than you would at the unplanned parenthood clinic.

I personally don't really care that much. Abortion is evolution in action. If a mother doesn't have the natural desire to have children, her gene's should be flushed out of the gene pool.

Plan9 · 08-31-2007, 04:26 PM

(masturbates furiously)

Oh, look! I just performed an abortion! I killed 50% of a new life!

Willravel · 08-31-2007, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

This logic applies to a TV show you don't like, but not to life.

IF you think that human life starts at conception then abortion is in fact murder at any time. You wouldn't tolerate people killing each other in the supermarket anymore than you would at the unplanned parenthood clinic.

I personally don't really care that much. Abortion is evolution in action. If a mother doesn't have the natural desire to have children, her gene's should be flushed out of the gene pool.

That assumes that the woman doesn't ever reproduce again after an abortion. Many do when they're old enough to be responsible.

DaveOrion · 08-31-2007, 04:35 PM

Everytime some guy spills his seed or a woman menstruates, thats life down the drain. Both sperm & ovum are alive, so lets all become catholic or fundamentalist christians and have numerous children we cant support.

The days of being fruitful & multiplying & covering the face of the earth are over. Time for a more realistic approach.

Willravel · 08-31-2007, 04:39 PM

Dave: am I crazy or am I a pro life atheist and you a pro choice Christian?

Plan9 · 08-31-2007, 04:48 PM

I don't believe in "populating god's army" or whatever they call it.

hannukah harry · 08-31-2007, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Infinite_Loser

Here's a better question which no one answered: Why are they having sex if they can't deal with the consequences? Didn't we all learn that life is full of choices, and there are always consequences-- Good or bad-- For those choices?

if someone isn't ready to be a parent, or if they are too irresponsible to handle the consequences of having sex, are they really someone you think is going to be responsible enough to raise a child?

do you think it's moral for someone to raise a child when they aren't responsible enough to raise? is it moral to have a child if you can't give it the care, love and attention, the emotional support, the education, etc, to be a productive and good member of society?

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

The law is society forcing people to make the moral choice.

since when does the law have anything to do with morality?

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

It prevents the egg from even sticking to the wall. That means within the 6 or so days it takes for fertilization to take, the thing just slips right out. No reproduction has occurred. I don't think it makes sense to go back too far, otherwise masturbation would be abortion.

you seem to be making an arbitrary choice here... why is taking a pill that prevents implantation (after fertilization) any different than a procedure or pill that removes the implanted cells?

if you think making an arbitrary goalpost for when halting a pregnancy is okay and when it isn't, why should your stopping point take precedence over mine?

and if you think that abortion should never be allowed, that your goal post is set at the beginning, you do need to go all the way back, at least to the moment of fertilization. the only reason i'd say you can't go so far back to call masterbation "abortion" (hey, any one of those sperms could be a potential person you're killing) is because women ovulate monthly and you can't really call that killing a potential person because they're not doing it by choice.

DaveOrion · 08-31-2007, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

Dave: am I crazy or am I a pro life atheist and you a pro choice Christian?

You're not crazy, isn't life strange???

Willravel · 08-31-2007, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannukah harry

since when does the law have anything to do with morality?

This is a joke? Or are you being cynical? I'm sorry, but it's tough to pick up on without nonverbal communication.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannukah harry

you seem to be making an arbitrary choice here... why is taking a pill that prevents implantation (after fertilization) any different than a procedure or pill that removes the implanted cells?

Neither a sperm nor an egg is a homo sapiens. When they converge and start dividing, they cease to be ovum and sperm and become a homo sapiens. I'd hardly call that arbitrary. Birth, on the other hand, is simply the difference between developmental stages. I don't see it as being much different than a girl getting her first period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannukah harry

if you think making an arbitrary goalpost for when halting a pregnancy is okay and when it isn't, why should your stopping point take precedence over mine?

Mine represents the change between two non-living entities and one living entity. Assuming your arbitrary goal post is birth, the kid is a human before and after birth. They're just in a bigger room and they eat through their mouths.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannukah harry

and if you think that abortion should never be allowed, that your goal post is set at the beginning, you do need to go all the way back, at least to the moment of fertilization. the only reason i'd say you can't go so far back to call masterbation "abortion" (hey, any one of those sperms could be a potential person you're killing) is because women ovulate monthly and you can't really call that killing a potential person because they're not doing it by choice.

There is ovum and sperm, then they combine, and as I understand it it takes something like 6 days for the egg to become fertilized and start into the process of turning into you or me. It's in that transition period that things like the morning after pill works, so it makes sense to use them. It's not about a *potential* person*, it's about a human being, meaning a living member of the species homo sapiens.

Infinite_Loser · 08-31-2007, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannukah harry

if someone isn't ready to be a parent, or if they are too irresponsible to handle the consequences of having sex, are they really someone you think is going to be responsible enough to raise a child?

do you think it's moral for someone to raise a child when they aren't responsible enough to raise? is it moral to have a child if you can't give it the care, love and attention, the emotional support, the education, etc, to be a productive and good member of society?

I've got the perfect solution to this problem: t's called "Stop having sex". Shocking, I know. But maybe if I say it enough times, it'll start to sink in

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

Dave: am I crazy or am I a pro life atheist and you a pro choice Christian?

I'd use the term Christian very losely.

hannukah harry · 08-31-2007, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

This is a joke? Or are you being cynical? I'm sorry, but it's tough to pick up on without nonverbal communication.

cynical more than joking... and while yes, sometimes laws are attempts at forced morality, in my opinion, rarely is the law about what's "moral."

Quote:

Neither a sperm nor an egg is a homo sapiens. When they converge and start dividing, they cease to be ovum and sperm and become a homo sapiens.

unless what i remember from biology class is a bit rusty, i believe you just described fertilization. which you previously said that until implanted, it's okay to abort through plan b.

Quote:

I'd hardly call that arbitrary.

we shall probably have to agree to disagree.

Quote:

Mine represents the change between two non-living entities and one living entity. Assuming your arbitrary goal post is birth, the kid is a human before and after birth. They're just in a bigger room and they eat through their mouths.

according to what you said earlier, your arbitrary point does not represent the change from two non-living to one living entity. you said implantation. either i'm reading you wrong, you said it wrong, or...?

i'm personally pro-abortion. and until a the fetus is viable, i think abortion should be legal. (just letting you know my arbitrary point of no return.)

Quote:

There is ovum and sperm, then they combine, and as I understand it it takes something like 6 days for the egg to become fertilized and start into the process of turning into you or me. It's in that transition period that things like the morning after pill works, so it makes sense to use them. It's not about a *potential* person*, it's about a human being, meaning a living member of the species homo sapiens.

i think we understand fertilizaton differently. my understanding is that fertilization is when the sperm and the egg combine. it takes just an instant. it may take another 6 days for implantation, but what difference does that make? they've combined into one cell, and the process has started. to say it's okay to wait 6 more days seems to me to be as arbitrary as saying the process can go on for 6 more weeks or 6 more months. it's still arbitrary. why should your arbitrary point take precedence over mine?

until birth, it's only a potential person... until it can successfully survive outside the womb, it's still only has potential. yes, it's a stage in the development of a homo sapian, it is a member of our species, but it's not a person (legally, morally or philosopically imo).

anyway, i'm about to hit the movies, i'm out for the night!

happy friday!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Infinite_Loser

I've got the perfect solution to this problem: t's called "Stop having sex". Shocking, I know. But maybe if I say it enough times, it'll start to sink in

in a perfect world... but this one ain't perfect!

Quote:

I'd use the term Christian very losely.

why do you get to define what is and isn't christian?

Willravel · 08-31-2007, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannukah harry

cynical more than joking... and while yes, sometimes laws are attempts at forced morality, in my opinion, rarely is the law about what's "moral."

Maybe I should say, "In an ideal world, laws are agreed on morality that society and government supports and even enforces."

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannukah harry

unless what i remember from biology class is a bit rusty, i believe you just described fertilization. which you previously said that until implanted, it's okay to abort through plan b.

Right, so when fertilization is complete, you no longer have egg and sperm; you've got a human being.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannukah harry

according to what you said earlier, your arbitrary point does not represent the change from two non-living to one living entity. you said implantation. either i'm reading you wrong, you said it wrong, or...?

I probably said it wrong. I remember a lot from human biology (4-5 years ago), but not everything. I hope the above makes it more clear. If my biology is still lacking, I might still have my textbook.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannukah harry

i'm personally pro-abortion. and until a the fetus is viable, i think abortion should be legal. (just letting you know my arbitrary point of no return.)

I guess that would make me "anti-choice". No surprise there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannukah harry

i think we understand fertilizaton differently. my understanding is that fertilization is when the sperm and the egg combine. it takes just an instant. it may take another 6 days for implantation, but what difference does that make? they've combined into one cell, and the process has started. to say it's okay to wait 6 more days seems to me to be as arbitrary as saying the process can go on for 6 more weeks or 6 more months. it's still arbitrary. why should your arbitrary point take precedence over mine?

I'll have to crack open that book, I guess.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannukah harry

until birth, it's only a potential person... until it can successfully survive outside the womb, it's still only has potential. yes, it's a stage in the development of a homo sapian, it is a member of our species, but it's not a person (legally, morally or philosopically imo).

Legally, it's not defined. Morally and philosophically, it's up to the individual, as of right now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannukah harry

anyway, i'm about to hit the movies, i'm out for the night!

happy friday!

Balls of Fury? Me too!

Ourcrazymodern? · 08-31-2007, 06:23 PM

Hi-ho!

Is anybody happy that they weren't aborted while only potential?

-just curious. I know I am.

Infinite_Loser · 08-31-2007, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannukah harry

in a perfect world... but this one ain't perfect!

Jeez... What a well thought out response. Yes, I know the world isn't perfect. I don't see what that has to do with being accountable for one's own actions. Explain, plz.

Quote:

why do you get to define what is and isn't christian?

Joke? >.>

Read my comment, then read the comment I commented on.

parable · 09-01-2007, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

A minor is quite literally anyone under the age of 18. A fetus is under the age of 18.

While it is true that a fetus is under the age of 18, it is not established that a fetus qualifies as "anyone". Any "one". "One" in this usages means "person", when recognized as a legal entity endowed with rights.

DaveOrion · 09-01-2007, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Infinite_Loser

I'd use the term Christian very losely.

Thanks I_L

, I don't care for that term anyway, as far as describing myself. As I already stated in the 'We Are God' thread, some may consider me a non-denominational Christian, but that really doesn't cover it.

There are already laws regarding the number of children you can have in China, and although they're loosely enforced, they will no doubt become more strict. India may follow soon, who knows. This planet has a limited amount of resources and laws governing child birth will have to be considered every where.

Willravel · 09-01-2007, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by parable

While it is true that a fetus is under the age of 18, it is not established that a fetus qualifies as "anyone". Any "one". "One" in this usages means "person", when recognized as a legal entity endowed with rights.

Adult = homo sapiens 18 or over
Minor = homo sapiens under 18

A baby is a member of our species.

And a fetus does have rights. Ever heard of situations where a pregnant woman is beaten? If the baby dies, the charge is murder. Talk about a double standard. It's only a person when the mom wants it. THAT is the part that makes me sick.

parable · 09-01-2007, 11:14 AM

willtravel,

A). The definition for person that you listed defined a person as "n. 1) a human being". You then said "The American legal term is either homo sapiens (derived from definition 1)"

Where is this derived? Is that your derivation? The law dictionary does not provide any information on the term "homo sapiens". By the way, the complete taxonomic term for modern mankind is "homo sapiens sapiens".

B) Regarding the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, someone once asked me “if killing an unborn baby by accident is manslaughter, what is killing it on purpose?" This person implies that intent should be relevant.

But, this act is predicated on the notion that the mother alone has the right to determine the fate of the fetus. Under the law, a fetus has no rights because a fetus is not recognized as a person. To underscore the rights of the mother, specific provisions of the Act prevent prosecution of the mother in any case, even if the mother survives a suicide attempt, but the fetus does not.

What one person calls "hypocrisy" with respect to intent in this kind of case, is more properly called "arbitrary" with respect to personhood. In order to resolve the controversy surrounding abortion, it will be necessary for us to reach consensus about what it means to be a person.

icevrething · 09-20-2007, 07:06 PM

From an ecological standpoint, pro choice would be beneficial to our earth considering the overconsumption of most 1st world countries. 1 American = 100 3rd world persons. Thus, if you're one of those people believing in pro life consider this: With pro choice there will be more resources for your offspring. Believe it or not there are couples that are intellectually competant that have no desire for a child. It is very easy for one to get pregnant; all it takes is a few drinks and one mind slip.

Willravel · 09-20-2007, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

it is really pretty simple, this:
if you oppose abortion dont have one.

If, like many people including myself, you believe abortion is murder, I suspect your statement might change.

If you oppose murder don't do it? Not good enough.

Ustwo · 09-20-2007, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by icevrething

From an ecological standpoint, pro choice would be beneficial to our earth considering the overconsumption of most 1st world countries. 1 American = 100 3rd world persons. Thus, if you're one of those people believing in pro life consider this: With pro choice there will be more resources for your offspring. Believe it or not there are couples that are intellectually competant that have no desire for a child. It is very easy for one to get pregnant; all it takes is a few drinks and one mind slip.

I've heard similar reasons before for why some couples are childless.

Its a bunch of crap really.

The western worlds population is shrinking, the US would be stable as is. The only growth is from immigration.

So you are not 'saving resources for you children' you are 'freeing resources for other peoples children'. There are parts of the world that are overpopulated, but its a local issue, the 'west' as we call it, isn't one of those parts.

So if you think not having children is saving the planet in some way you are sadly mistaken.

Lady Sage · 09-21-2007, 02:14 AM

If a woman is brutally raped, lets sasy by 10 people, should she be forced to carry it around for 9 months and then give birth to it? Should she then be plagued by thoughts about what is it like now?

Plan9 · 09-21-2007, 02:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

So if you think not having children is saving the planet in some way you are sadly mistaken.

What was that scary statistic I read recently? Some end-of-the-world book about Muslims taking over the planet through rabbit-like reproduction.

...

Anyways, it was something vaguely silly like:

By 2075ish... a staggeringly significant portion of the earth's population will be of middle eastern / asian ethnicity.

Such "primitive" cultures simply have (on average) 4 times as many children as the American 2-and-change.

Whitey is going to be extinct.

...

Not a bad thing, maybe.

Ustwo · 09-21-2007, 05:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Sage

If a woman is brutally raped, lets sasy by 10 people, should she be forced to carry it around for 9 months and then give birth to it? Should she then be plagued by thoughts about what is it like now?

Would you be in favor of no abortion except in cases of rape?

Its a nice red herring, but it really isn't the argument.

tecoyah · 09-21-2007, 05:36 AM

In my opinion, MY opinion only applies to ME. If I could get pregnant (which I cannot), I would be opposed to getting an abortion simply because its my eventual Kid. If You could get pregnant (which you cannot), I would have no right to tell you not to do whatever you want with your body, any more than I could tell you not to drink Whiskey, or smoke Tobacco.

Its simply none of my business, and unless its your wife we are talking about...its not yours either.

Ustwo · 09-21-2007, 05:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tecoyah

In my opinion, MY opinion only applies to ME. If I could get pregnant (which I cannot), I would be opposed to getting an abortion simply because its my eventual Kid. If You could get pregnant (which you cannot), I would have no right to tell you not to do whatever you want with your body, any more than I could tell you not to drink Whiskey, or smoke Tobacco.

Its simply none of my business, and unless its your wife we are talking about...its not yours either.

So you are putting a child on the level of a harmful drug?

I'm not anti-abortion myself, but the 'pro' arguments really need to quit trying to sugar coat the issue.

With abortion you are killing a viable human. It doesn't matter that its only viable while with the mother. For one thing children are only 'viable' with adult care for the first decade or so of their life, another issue will be there will come a time when you can have an 'artificial womb' in which case the argument will be void.

In some odd way this reminds me of the arguments for music/software piracy. Everyone is trying to hard to justify it and can't say 'Yes I'm stealing it'. Its time to face the music here too, "Yes an abortion kills a human, but I don't think its that big a deal."

No one wants to be the bad guy but an abortion is a purely selfish act, even when it is justifiable, and I do think you can have a justifiable abortion.

Lady Sage · 09-21-2007, 06:03 AM

So a woman should be forced to carry the child that resulted in a rape?

EDIT: Let us say for just a moment that (gods forbid) your wife were raped. Let us also for a moment say that she got knocked up by this vile person. You are saying, since a baby is a human and should not be murdered, that you would force your wife to carry a child not your own and then raise this child? A child that will remind your wife every day of her life that she was raped?

Surely if you dont believe in murdering your child, you couldnt possibly believe in giving part of your wife up for adoption. That would be like... abandonment!

Ustwo · 09-21-2007, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Sage

So a woman should be forced to carry the child that resulted in a rape?

I never said that, not even close.

I said its a red herring argument of the pro-abortion crowd.

Its one of those horrible things where most people, even most anti-abortion types would say an abortion is justifiable.

But the vast, vast majority of abortions have nothing to do with rape.

What I asked if a law was passed that made abortion only allowed in cases of rape would you support that?

If not then the rape issue isn't your real issue and its not the point, its just an awful example used to justify the true motivation.

If my wife was raped and became pregnant I would want her to get an abortion, but honestly it would be the morning after pill so it wouldn't get to that stage.

08-31-2007, 02:36 PM	#241 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	And I wouldnt accept "unborn child" as a proper characterization. Which is why we're still at zero. BTW, I think abortion is wrong in many instances and I would counsel a woman against it, but I wont force my morals on others who bear the burden (no pun intended) of making that most difficult moral choice. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire

08-31-2007, 02:43 PM	#244 (permalink)
Infinite_Loser Junkie Location: Lake Mary, FL	So you're saying that it's easier to raise a child as a man than it is as a woman because you'll make more? Really, I can't begin to tell you how faulty such an assumption is. Regardless of how much you make (Or don't make), one should be responsible for his/her actions. You're not ready to be a parent? Then either buy protection or don't have sex. It's not a hard concept to understand and I'll continue to repeat it for as long as it takes. A woman shouldn't be able to shun her parental duties simply because she's a woman. Like I said, I'll agree with abortion when men don't have to pay child support. Of course, most of the abortion rights activists will argue that giving men the option to not pay child support would increase reckless behavior. Of course, said people also ignore the fact that a good chunk of people who've had an abortion done also had one or more in the past. ...Oh well for that whole 'reckless behavior' crap. __________________ I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me. Last edited by Infinite_Loser; 08-31-2007 at 02:46 PM..

08-31-2007, 02:45 PM	#245 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	And yet you still havent explained why your moral position on when life begins (when there is no medical consensus) should be imposed on others. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire

08-31-2007, 02:51 PM	#247 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	will...do you think the morning after pill is taking the life of a "yet to be named preborn"? __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire

08-31-2007, 02:57 PM	#250 (permalink)
Infinite_Loser Junkie Location: Lake Mary, FL	Nice way to twist around what I was saying . The point I was making is that 'No consensus' =/= 'Right'. You still haven't explained to me why women shouldn't have to be responsible for the choices they make. __________________ I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me.

08-31-2007, 02:58 PM	#251 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	There was no twist. It still comes down to the core issue of when life begins. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire

08-31-2007, 04:26 PM	#254 (permalink)
Plan9 I Confess a Shiver	(masturbates furiously) Oh, look! I just performed an abortion! I killed 50% of a new life! __________________ *Whatever you can carry.* "You should not drink... and bake."

08-31-2007, 04:35 PM	#256 (permalink)
DaveOrion Playing With Fire Location: Disaster Area	Everytime some guy spills his seed or a woman menstruates, thats life down the drain. Both sperm & ovum are alive, so lets all become catholic or fundamentalist christians and have numerous children we cant support. The days of being fruitful & multiplying & covering the face of the earth are over. Time for a more realistic approach. __________________ *Syriana*...have you ever tried liquid MDMA?....Liquid MDMA? No....Arash, when you wanna do this?.....After prayer...

08-31-2007, 04:39 PM	#257 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Dave: am I crazy or am I a pro life atheist and you a pro choice Christian?

08-31-2007, 04:48 PM	#258 (permalink)
Plan9 I Confess a Shiver	I don't believe in "populating god's army" or whatever they call it. __________________ *Whatever you can carry.* "You should not drink... and bake."

08-31-2007, 06:23 PM	#265 (permalink)
Ourcrazymodern? still, wondering. Location: South Minneapolis, somewhere near the gorgeous gorge	Hi-ho! Is anybody happy that they weren't aborted while only potential? -just curious. I know I am. __________________ BE JUST AND FEAR NOT

09-01-2007, 11:14 AM	#270 (permalink)
parable Upright	unborn victims of violence act willtravel, A). The definition for person that you listed defined a person as "n. 1) a human being". You then said "The American legal term is either homo sapiens (derived from definition 1)" Where is this derived? Is that your derivation? The law dictionary does not provide any information on the term "homo sapiens". By the way, the complete taxonomic term for modern mankind is "homo sapiens sapiens". B) Regarding the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, someone once asked me “if killing an unborn baby by accident is manslaughter, what is killing it on purpose?" This person implies that intent should be relevant. But, this act is predicated on the notion that the mother alone has the right to determine the fate of the fetus. Under the law, a fetus has no rights because a fetus is not recognized as a person. To underscore the rights of the mother, specific provisions of the Act prevent prosecution of the mother in any case, even if the mother survives a suicide attempt, but the fetus does not. What one person calls "hypocrisy" with respect to intent in this kind of case, is more properly called "arbitrary" with respect to personhood. In order to resolve the controversy surrounding abortion, it will be necessary for us to reach consensus about what it means to be a person. __________________ "If you aren't confused, you haven't been paying attention."

09-20-2007, 07:06 PM	#271 (permalink)
icevrething Upright Location: Lincoln, NE	From an ecological standpoint, pro choice would be beneficial to our earth considering the overconsumption of most 1st world countries. 1 American = 100 3rd world persons. Thus, if you're one of those people believing in pro life consider this: With pro choice there will be more resources for your offspring. Believe it or not there are couples that are intellectually competant that have no desire for a child. It is very easy for one to get pregnant; all it takes is a few drinks and one mind slip.

09-21-2007, 02:14 AM	#274 (permalink)
Lady Sage Mistress of Mayhem Location: Canton, Ohio	If a woman is brutally raped, lets sasy by 10 people, should she be forced to carry it around for 9 months and then give birth to it? Should she then be plagued by thoughts about what is it like now? __________________ If only closed minds came with closed mouths. Minds are like parachutes, they function best when open. It`s Easier to Change a Condom Than a Diaper Yes, the rumors are true... I actually AM a Witch.

09-21-2007, 05:36 AM	#277 (permalink)
tecoyah Illusionary	In my opinion, MY opinion only applies to ME. If I could get pregnant (which I cannot), I would be opposed to getting an abortion simply because its my eventual Kid. If You could get pregnant (which you cannot), I would have no right to tell you not to do whatever you want with your body, any more than I could tell you not to drink Whiskey, or smoke Tobacco. Its simply none of my business, and unless its your wife we are talking about...its not yours either. __________________ Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

09-21-2007, 06:03 AM	#279 (permalink)
Lady Sage Mistress of Mayhem Location: Canton, Ohio	So a woman should be forced to carry the child that resulted in a rape? EDIT: Let us say for just a moment that (gods forbid) your wife were raped. Let us also for a moment say that she got knocked up by this vile person. You are saying, since a baby is a human and should not be murdered, that you would force your wife to carry a child not your own and then raise this child? A child that will remind your wife every day of her life that she was raped? Surely if you dont believe in murdering your child, you couldnt possibly believe in giving part of your wife up for adoption. That would be like... abandonment! __________________ If only closed minds came with closed mouths. Minds are like parachutes, they function best when open. It`s Easier to Change a Condom Than a Diaper Yes, the rumors are true... I actually AM a Witch. Last edited by Lady Sage; 09-21-2007 at 06:07 AM..