10 Reasons The World Thinks The US Is Crazy Re: Abortion

User avatar
Jack
Evil Reincarnated
Posts: 13044
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 8:42 pm
Alliance: The Empire
Race: Dragonborn
ID: 6475
Location: Whiterun

Re: 10 Reasons The World Thinks The US Is Crazy Re: Abortion

deni wrote:Your position has been confusing, so either I cannot understand it or you cannot express it. Thus I asked for clarification you refuse to give. Makes me wonder why.

Jack wrote:Capital punishment is not murder, war is rarely murder, self defense is not murder. Abortions when it is medically necessary to prevent death and possibly serious bodily injury is not murder, it's self defense. Self defense does not require that the aggressor always be a criminal, they can be innocent of any wrong doing. But because of circumstance wholly outside of their control, they immediate threat to life and limb. It's not pleasant, it might make you sick to your stomach. But in all honesty, when is self defense ever a pleasant experience?

Doesn't get much more direct than that.
Ya'll acting like you know what monster is
Me have 25 years in the monster biz
All monsters think you can fuss with this
Well you can talk to me Snuffleupagus
Me sneak into your house, me leave before dawn
Your daughters will be pregnant and your cookies will be gone
Image
Malx wrote:Make kids not cancer!
User avatar
deni
The Initiate
Posts: 5210
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:18 am
Alliance: THE DARK DOMINIUM
Race: Goddess
ID: 75493

Honours and Awards

Re: 10 Reasons The World Thinks The US Is Crazy Re: Abortion

You state in the quoted post above, that abortions are murder. Yet, a few post earlier, you state that abortions are fine, as long as they take not place in the fetal state and there is no brain waves. This implies that for you abortions are perfectly ok if they take place before the fetal phase and/or there is not brain waves yet. This contradicts your statement, that all abortions done for other than medical reasons are murder.

So I ask you again. Are all abortions murder for you or does the line "fetus/brain waves" apply?

As for abortions done for medical reasons - you still owe me a definition when an abortion is medically necessary - only in cases of certain health damage or does probable health damage / risks also warrant an abortion for medical reasons in your opinion?



As I see that you still refuse to back up your statement, that outward signs indicating female fertility days exist, I will assume that you avoid to back it up simply because you cannot.
Image

If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.



Keep smiling, it makes people wonder what you're up to
User avatar
Jack
Evil Reincarnated
Posts: 13044
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 8:42 pm
Alliance: The Empire
Race: Dragonborn
ID: 6475
Location: Whiterun

Re: 10 Reasons The World Thinks The US Is Crazy Re: Abortion

deni wrote:You state in the quoted post above, that abortions are murder. Yet, a few post earlier, you state that abortions are fine, as long as they take not place in the fetal state and there is no brain waves. This implies that for you abortions are perfectly ok if they take place before the fetal phase and/or there is not brain waves yet. This contradicts your statement, that all abortions done for other than medical reasons are murder.

So I ask you again. Are all abortions murder for you or does the line "fetus/brain waves" apply?

That question has already been answered, multiple times might I add. I have not stated that all abortions are murder unless medically necessary.
Ya'll acting like you know what monster is
Me have 25 years in the monster biz
All monsters think you can fuss with this
Well you can talk to me Snuffleupagus
Me sneak into your house, me leave before dawn
Your daughters will be pregnant and your cookies will be gone
Image
Malx wrote:Make kids not cancer!
User avatar
deni
The Initiate
Posts: 5210
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:18 am
Alliance: THE DARK DOMINIUM
Race: Goddess
ID: 75493

Honours and Awards

Re: 10 Reasons The World Thinks The US Is Crazy Re: Abortion

Dovahkiin wrote:
deni wrote:You state in the quoted post above, that abortions are murder. Yet, a few post earlier, you state that abortions are fine, as long as they take not place in the fetal state and there is no brain waves. This implies that for you abortions are perfectly ok if they take place before the fetal phase and/or there is not brain waves yet. This contradicts your statement, that all abortions done for other than medical reasons are murder.

So I ask you again. Are all abortions murder for you or does the line "fetus/brain waves" apply?

That question has already been answered, multiple times might I add. I have not stated that all abortions are murder unless medically necessary.



I reread your posts, yet I cannot find what you claim to have posted. All I see is statements saying "murder is murder" and that "women should take responsibility" except in cases of rape or medically necessary abortions. Btw, while it is convient to use the "medically necessary" phrase, you still have not specified when, to put it in your words, a murder can be justified by medical reasons (probable health damage vs certain damage - where is the line?)

Instead of telling me that you have posted something already, it would be best to just answer my questions and explain your position again. Because I still fail to see a clear non-contradicting position just as I fail to see you backing up statements that you have made, for example like the one about the existense of outward fertility signs.


So what is your position?

"Murder is murder" or "abortion is ok if it is done before the fetal state"?
Image

If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.



Keep smiling, it makes people wonder what you're up to
User avatar
Jack
Evil Reincarnated
Posts: 13044
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 8:42 pm
Alliance: The Empire
Race: Dragonborn
ID: 6475
Location: Whiterun

Re: 10 Reasons The World Thinks The US Is Crazy Re: Abortion

Dovahkiin wrote:Capital punishment is not murder, war is rarely murder, self defense is not murder. Abortions when it is medically necessary to prevent death and possibly serious bodily injury is not murder, it's self defense. Self defense does not require that the aggressor always be a criminal, they can be innocent of any wrong doing. But because of circumstance wholly outside of their control, they immediate threat to life and limb. It's not pleasant, it might make you sick to your stomach. But in all honesty, when is self defense ever a pleasant experience?

Dovahkiin wrote:If you can show me conclusive evidence of when exactly life starts, then I'd support abortion upto that point.

None of this is contradictory. Abortion can not be murder if what is being destroyed is not a living person.
Ya'll acting like you know what monster is
Me have 25 years in the monster biz
All monsters think you can fuss with this
Well you can talk to me Snuffleupagus
Me sneak into your house, me leave before dawn
Your daughters will be pregnant and your cookies will be gone
Image
Malx wrote:Make kids not cancer!
User avatar
deni
The Initiate
Posts: 5210
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:18 am
Alliance: THE DARK DOMINIUM
Race: Goddess
ID: 75493

Honours and Awards

Re: 10 Reasons The World Thinks The US Is Crazy Re: Abortion

Dovahkiin wrote:
Dovahkiin wrote:Capital punishment is not murder, war is rarely murder, self defense is not murder. Abortions when it is medically necessary to prevent death and possibly serious bodily injury is not murder, it's self defense. Self defense does not require that the aggressor always be a criminal, they can be innocent of any wrong doing. But because of circumstance wholly outside of their control, they immediate threat to life and limb. It's not pleasant, it might make you sick to your stomach. But in all honesty, when is self defense ever a pleasant experience?

Dovahkiin wrote:If you can show me conclusive evidence of when exactly life starts, then I'd support abortion upto that point.

None of this is contradictory. Abortion can not be murder if what is being destroyed is not a living person.



I have read your posts, so there is no need to repeteadly quote them. I would prefer you would answer my questions or back up your statements about human female physiology.

So where do you draw the line? Is an embryo a living person? Is a fetus a living person? Can something that is not viable outside the uterus be a living person at all?

How severe/certain has the endargement to a woman's health be to justify an abortion?
Image

If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.



Keep smiling, it makes people wonder what you're up to
User avatar
MEZZANINE
Forum Addict
Posts: 4453
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 8:39 am
Alliance: Forgotten Serenity
Race: System Lord
ID: 81691
Location: CARDIFF

Re: 10 Reasons The World Thinks The US Is Crazy Re: Abortion

@ Deni, all fair points, and yes the big questions are

1) When does an embryo become alive in it's own right, and be given it's own right to survive

2) What definition of health issues ( mental or physical ) could justify ending one life ( the baby ) to preserve or improve the quality of another ( the mother )

BUT I do stress the Fathers & Babies missing rights on abortions, it seems very unfair to me that in this age of so called 'equal rights' the rights in this subject are given purely to the mother, the father has no say and the baby is very much ignored



You are also right about 'backstreet' abortions, they happened before it was legalised and would happen again if it was made illegal, BUT just because people do something regardless of the law that doesnt make it right or mean it should be legal.
Image

Image

Image
Spoiler
Attack Mercs Killed (30) 459,329,001
Defence Mercs Killed (10) 2,918,478,517
Attack Soldiers Killed(60) 12,677,958
Defence Soldiers Killed(20) 226,236,488
Attack Super Soldiers Killed(300) 490,627,262
Defence Super Soldiers Killed(100) 4,131,482,551
Spies Killed(50) 4,256,505,842
Spy Killers Killed(50) 651,022,448
Mothership Weapons Destroyed(300) 35,583,034
Mothership Shields Destroyed(300) 39,498,511
Mothership Fleets Destroyed(200) 2,413,254
Planet Defences Destroyed(300) 358,539
Planets Taken(5000) 411
Naquadah Stolen(0.0001) 2,355,738,435,154,805
Untrained Kidnapped(50) 5,943,886,456
Weapon Points Destroyed (Sab+Att)(0.0001) 74,293,522,376,607
Attack Turns Used(1) 1,731,971
User avatar
deni
The Initiate
Posts: 5210
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:18 am
Alliance: THE DARK DOMINIUM
Race: Goddess
ID: 75493

Honours and Awards

Re: 10 Reasons The World Thinks The US Is Crazy Re: Abortion

MEZZANINE wrote:@ Deni, all fair points, and yes the big questions are

1) When does an embryo become alive in it's own right, and be given it's own right to survive

2) What definition of health issues ( mental or physical ) could justify ending one life ( the baby ) to preserve or improve the quality of another ( the mother )

BUT I do stress the Fathers & Babies missing rights on abortions, it seems very unfair to me that in this age of so called 'equal rights' the rights in this subject are given purely to the mother, the father has no say and the baby is very much ignored



You are also right about 'backstreet' abortions, they happened before it was legalised and would happen again if it was made illegal, BUT just because people do something regardless of the law that doesnt make it right or mean it should be legal.



The main question is, what do people want to achieve by making abortions illegal - punishment for the women or more children being born. If they aim at the later, than there are more suitable means to achieve that by providing enough support for the mother to be in order for her not to be at any disadvantage by carrying the child to term - be it affordardble day care, better employment laws regarding the protection of pregnant women / young mothers, financial help in the first months/years after giving birth and so on.


As for the supposed fathers having a say regarding an abortion: how do you think it should be implemented?

The main problem is, that while the mother is surely known, the paternity cannot be known/proven 99.9% until a DNA test can be made. DNA tests in utero are not done and are not feasible because of the risks involved for the woman and the embryo. What if the supposed father had a say and prevents an abortion, yet it turns out he is not the biological father at all? Should men have a veto? Should women be forced to tell who they had sex with before being able to make an abortion in order to determine the possible father?

More rights for men regarding abortions might sound nice, yet I do see a lot of problems that come with it making it hardly feasible. At least in my eyes.
Image

If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.



Keep smiling, it makes people wonder what you're up to
Psyko
The Irresistible
Posts: 5636
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 5:09 pm
ID: 0
Location: USA

Re: 10 Reasons The World Thinks The US Is Crazy Re: Abortion

My issues with the abortion debate:

Society cannot agree on the exact time when life starts.
Some say conception, others say heart beat, others still say brain activity, and the list goes on from there. Therefore, people against killing an unborn child simply agree it shouldn't happen. Thus, they all determine abortion should be illegal. Period. End of. Blanket statement.

Religious individuals and organizations forcing their ideals on other people.
Let me start by saying I was raised Christian in a democratic country. Something Christians and democratic countries have in common is the absolute need to force their lifestyle and opinions on others. I dispise these attributes.

A person should not go door to door and question another person's faith if it differs from their own. They should also not try to force laws upon a group of people within their society simply because they disagree with it. I understand many Christians believe conception is the beginning of life, gays are the devil, and all forms of contraception is murder because it prevents the potential life of a child. Granted, not all Christians believe all of those things. But if enough of them get together, they might be able to get it passed as law (see Santorum's religious convictions).

This is one of my biggest pet peeves. I cannot stand people who force their ideas on to other people. At least if abortion laws allow for a choice, the Christians and those against abortion can live how they like (ie not having an abortion if they become pregnant) while other people can live how they like (ie deciding to keep the child or abort).

I do want to say I am not meaning to single out Christians. I'm also against Muslims who believe non-Muslims should convert or die. I'm against salesmen who refuse to accept the fact that I don't need new siding on my house. I ignore people who tell me I shouldn't have painted my room red. I dispise children who feel the need to make other kids feel like less of a human being just so they can feel like more of a person. I am wholeheartedly against those nosey people who yack your ear off on a flight. Mostly, I hate everyone who impede on how I wish to live my life so long as how I live does not encroach on the lives of others.

Inconsistencies in those who support abortion.
The major inconsistency is the "unless it is rape or incest" clause so many people like to add as if it makes them more humane. The reason for this inconsistency is these people do not want to be seen as unsympathetic to a victim. They don't want to be the "monster" who forced a woman to carry the child of the monster who attacked and brutally savaged her. So they have this wonderful clause to appease the masses and try to get them to support the bill because they truly aren't trying to force women to birth unwanted children. "See, there's a rape clause!" #-o

And the incest portion of the clause is because these individuals are disgusted by the idea of siblings having sex, marrying, or birthing a child. There are those who also recognize incest can cause severe birth defects, but if they were truly worried about birth and genetic defects they would add that clause to the list of exceptions as well. So they support aborting the abomination of an incestual love child because the idea disgusts them. But hey, if they kid is going to be born into a vegetative state and suck the life out of their parents for 58 years with medical care costs and poor life conditions that child has a right to life, dammit.




I want people to pick a side. If murder is murder, then it counts all the time. If murder is only murder after the legal definition of life begins, then it counts only if the fetus has passed such a point. If abortion is not murder, then no prosecution can come to those who abort a fetus.

I support abortion. A choice should be given. I believe life starts at birth. This is supported by medical cases where the doctor records the time of birth and time of death. Rick Santorum's child "lived for a few hours" not "for 10 months and 3 hours". If a mother kills a child after it has taken its first breath in this world it is murder. Therefore, abortion is not murder to me. Abortion is not always about the mother. Sure, many times it is, but we must also acknowledge those cases where a child will be born with severe mental and/or physical disabilities.

That being said, I don't know if I could ever abort a child. One moment I can't see myself doing it, and the next I do consider the possibility I may make that decision. I don't know what I would be going through if/when I have the option of making that decision. But I do hope that if it ever comes to that day, I will still have the legal choice to make it.
愛美
Section Admin of
General and the GC
Image
Image
User avatar
MEZZANINE
Forum Addict
Posts: 4453
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 8:39 am
Alliance: Forgotten Serenity
Race: System Lord
ID: 81691
Location: CARDIFF

Re: 10 Reasons The World Thinks The US Is Crazy Re: Abortion

deni wrote:
MEZZANINE wrote:@ Deni, all fair points, and yes the big questions are

1) When does an embryo become alive in it's own right, and be given it's own right to survive

2) What definition of health issues ( mental or physical ) could justify ending one life ( the baby ) to preserve or improve the quality of another ( the mother )

BUT I do stress the Fathers & Babies missing rights on abortions, it seems very unfair to me that in this age of so called 'equal rights' the rights in this subject are given purely to the mother, the father has no say and the baby is very much ignored



You are also right about 'backstreet' abortions, they happened before it was legalised and would happen again if it was made illegal, BUT just because people do something regardless of the law that doesnt make it right or mean it should be legal.



The main question is, what do people want to achieve by making abortions illegal - punishment for the women or more children being born. If they aim at the later, than there are more suitable means to achieve that by providing enough support for the mother to be in order for her not to be at any disadvantage by carrying the child to term - be it affordardble day care, better employment laws regarding the protection of pregnant women / young mothers, financial help in the first months/years after giving birth and so on.


As for the supposed fathers having a say regarding an abortion: how do you think it should be implemented?

The main problem is, that while the mother is surely known, the paternity cannot be known/proven 99.9% until a DNA test can be made. DNA tests in utero are not done and are not feasible because of the risks involved for the woman and the embryo. What if the supposed father had a say and prevents an abortion, yet it turns out he is not the biological father at all? Should men have a veto? Should women be forced to tell who they had sex with before being able to make an abortion in order to determine the possible father?

More rights for men regarding abortions might sound nice, yet I do see a lot of problems that come with it making it hardly feasible. At least in my eyes.



While I agree that women who have children need support, ideally by the father through child support, but by the state if the father is unable to provide it........

The problem is that has been tried already and failed miserably in the UK.

The CSA ( Child Support Agency ) took so much of fathers incomes that they could not afford to live themselves, there were several high profile cases of fathers driven to suicide by this organisation, and countless more where the fathers simply gave up work because it wasnt worth them working for the income/lifestyle they were left with. Fact is most household these days need two average incomes just to get by, trying to make one average income support two household is simply impossible, the numbers just dont add up. The other issue is access, many fathers are forced to pay support yet get no access to see their own children, family courts in the UK are a disgrace, they award custody automatically to the mother regardless of who is the best parent or provider, and even when they give fathers access they dont enforce it, they only enforce the financial support side. Hence why we have protest groups like 'Fathers for Justice'.



The State provision of income support and housing had an equally negative effect, thousands of young women who left school with little in the way of qualification or employment prospects, facing living at home for years to come because of housing prices soon realised they could get a FREE house and FREE income for the next 16-18 years by having kids and deliberately got pregnant not because they wanted children, but just because it offered them a far better quality of housing and lifestyle than minimum wage work. This put a massive strain on the benefits system and took social housing away from those that needed it and gave it to those who got pregnant just to get it.

The response to this, a public backlash at these lazy greedy single teenage mums........... even the ones who hadnt done the above, because of the ones that did.





As for determining the father at such an early stage, your right it relies on both partners being honest about when they had sex. But on them 'not knowing' I really would hope that they are not such slappers that they could have had sex with several men in a week or so, and frankly dont think a person who didnt know for that reason would make a fit mother. I do understand that one night stands happen and names/numbers are not always kept, so I suppose you are right, that could happen, and could also be used as a lie to avoid a known father getting a say regardless of what the law said.

BUT in the case of a couple, where the both know about the pregnancy and one decides they dont want it I think the door should swing both ways.
Image

Image

Image
Spoiler
Attack Mercs Killed (30) 459,329,001
Defence Mercs Killed (10) 2,918,478,517
Attack Soldiers Killed(60) 12,677,958
Defence Soldiers Killed(20) 226,236,488
Attack Super Soldiers Killed(300) 490,627,262
Defence Super Soldiers Killed(100) 4,131,482,551
Spies Killed(50) 4,256,505,842
Spy Killers Killed(50) 651,022,448
Mothership Weapons Destroyed(300) 35,583,034
Mothership Shields Destroyed(300) 39,498,511
Mothership Fleets Destroyed(200) 2,413,254
Planet Defences Destroyed(300) 358,539
Planets Taken(5000) 411
Naquadah Stolen(0.0001) 2,355,738,435,154,805
Untrained Kidnapped(50) 5,943,886,456
Weapon Points Destroyed (Sab+Att)(0.0001) 74,293,522,376,607
Attack Turns Used(1) 1,731,971
Zeratul
Elder Administrator
Posts: 23203
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 8:44 am
Alliance: Lucian Alliance
Race: Templar
ID: 7
Alternate name(s): Hrefna
Reitha
Location: Nivlheim

Honours and Awards

Re: 10 Reasons The World Thinks The US Is Crazy Re: Abortion

hmm... we're going to pose a few scenarios to you... yes, this is mainly aimed at those of you that oppose abortion, though the rest can also answer...

Case 1:
What would the answer be, in a society with such laws as are mentioned here, both as theories and as truths, making abortion illegal, where there is a pregnancy in someone fairly young (sub-20), with neither her, the child's father, nor the family of either parent wishing the pregnancy to come to fruition?

Case 2:
Same setting, only this time, the child's parents tried to use contraceptives during the reproductive act(s), yet those failed for reason:
(a) improper use due to lack of education related to contraceptives being forbidden by law
(b) Contraceptive medium failed due to material failure and/or production error, not due to maluse.

Case 3:
Contraception and abortion is forbidden by law and subject to long prison sentences no matter what the reason might be in said country/state/region (pick whichever fits).
(a) A young girl, barely into puberty, is raped. Her body is not physically mature and pregnancy is likely to seriously hurt the mother. She (obviously) becomes pregnant from the rape.
(b) Same as (a), only this time there's a couple of additional factors. The father/rapist is known to have multiple sexually transmittable diseases. The mother has a hereditary disease that will guarantee a poor life for the child.
(c) same as (a), only now there is a hereditary condition in one parent for 92% of children to die sometime in the 7th or 8th month of pregnancy with a 83% chance of the mother dying as well.

Case 4:
The Mother is utterly incapable of raising a child, has neither the mental, economical nor the physical capacity to raise a child.

Case 5: (this one might be a bit silly)
The parents are both strongly believing satanists and plan to ritually sacrifice it a few months after birth. Only abortion will cause them to relent. The place the parents live has freedom of religion, but not of abortion, so human sacrifice is not technically criminal in the situation.


In which cases would you say abortion is acceptable, and in which ones would it be utterly wrong? Please try to answer them separately and do provide reasons with the answers.

-- -- -- -- -- -- --

In case you wonder, we're generally for people having a choice. We think its better to have a safe system by medical officials for the removal of potential children from the wombs of human females than it is for them to use whatever means they can find. Since we do not experience the condition of pregnancy ourselves, we cannot speak fully about it. Considering that it is the female that will carry the child, the main part of the choice should rest with that one, but the male should have some say, and more importantly, what would be best for the child should also be considered. So first influence should be mother, then what would be best for child, then finally the father. Sometimes the first two should be switched. Before anyone says so, life is not always the best thing for a fetus. If the mother is alone, living in poverty on the streets, frequently racked by disease, then it is not a good place for a child to be born into.
The cases above are all set a bit on the edge, but please consider them before answering.
Image
Image
"Great holy armies shall be gathered and trained to fight all who embrace evil. In the name of the gods, Browsers shall be changed to carry the internet out amongst the peoples and we will spread Firefox to all the unbelievers. The power of the Firefox will be felt far and wide and the wicked users of IE shall be converted to use the true browsers."

Curious about our color? Feel free to ask...
User avatar
Jack
Evil Reincarnated
Posts: 13044
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 8:42 pm
Alliance: The Empire
Race: Dragonborn
ID: 6475
Location: Whiterun

Re: 10 Reasons The World Thinks The US Is Crazy Re: Abortion

Psyko wrote:My issues with the abortion debate:

Society cannot agree on the exact time when life starts.
Some say conception, others say heart beat, others still say brain activity, and the list goes on from there. Therefore, people against killing an unborn child simply agree it shouldn't happen. Thus, they all determine abortion should be illegal. Period. End of. Blanket statement.

The argument that life begins at conception is largely philosophical. Just as the argument that life begins at birth. Both are silly, but I would posit that the argument life begins at birth is just plain retarded.

Psyko wrote:Religious individuals and organizations forcing their ideals on other people.
Let me start by saying I was raised Christian in a democratic country. Something Christians and democratic countries have in common is the absolute need to force their lifestyle and opinions on others. I dispise these attributes.

A person should not go door to door and question another person's faith if it differs from their own. They should also not try to force laws upon a group of people within their society simply because they disagree with it. I understand many Christians believe conception is the beginning of life, gays are the devil, and all forms of contraception is murder because it prevents the potential life of a child. Granted, not all Christians believe all of those things. But if enough of them get together, they might be able to get it passed as law (see Santorum's religious convictions).

This is one of my biggest pet peeves. I cannot stand people who force their ideas on to other people. At least if abortion laws allow for a choice, the Christians and those against abortion can live how they like (ie not having an abortion if they become pregnant) while other people can live how they like (ie deciding to keep the child or abort).

I do want to say I am not meaning to single out Christians. I'm also against Muslims who believe non-Muslims should convert or die. I'm against salesmen who refuse to accept the fact that I don't need new siding on my house. I ignore people who tell me I shouldn't have painted my room red. I dispise children who feel the need to make other kids feel like less of a human being just so they can feel like more of a person. I am wholeheartedly against those nosey people who yack your ear off on a flight. Mostly, I hate everyone who impede on how I wish to live my life so long as how I live does not encroach on the lives of others.

And this is my issue with those that support abortion. The argument isn't, "oh well god said this" or that "my morals dictate that." It's that the unborn child is a living human being and that killing it is no different than killing someone that has been born. That murder laws should apply in both instances.

Psyko wrote:Inconsistencies in those who support abortion.
The major inconsistency is the "unless it is rape or incest" clause so many people like to add as if it makes them more humane. The reason for this inconsistency is these people do not want to be seen as unsympathetic to a victim. They don't want to be the "monster" who forced a woman to carry the child of the monster who attacked and brutally savaged her. So they have this wonderful clause to appease the masses and try to get them to support the bill because they truly aren't trying to force women to birth unwanted children. "See, there's a rape clause!" #-o

I agree that it's hypocritical to state that abortion is wrong unless it's for incest. Once again, I refuse to get into the debate regarding rape abortions. The subject really requires a discussion of it's own. There's so many angles to look at and discuss and the debate is sure to piss off just about everyone.

Also, I agree with you about the reasons that people support abortions for incest but not in most other cases. But not so much for the reasons that those who would support rape abortions but not abortions in other instances. Mostly because there's the whole mental health aspect.

Psyko wrote:I want people to pick a side. If murder is murder, then it counts all the time. If murder is only murder after the legal definition of life begins, then it counts only if the fetus has passed such a point. If abortion is not murder, then no prosecution can come to those who abort a fetus.

Murder is always murder. But killing someone isn't always murder. Murder has a definition ya know.

You're absolutely right that no prosecution can come if no crime is committed, no one is arguing any differently and murder is a legal concept. People seem to forget that.

Psyko wrote:I support abortion. A choice should be given. I believe life starts at birth. This is supported by medical cases where the doctor records the time of birth and time of death. Rick Santorum's child "lived for a few hours" not "for 10 months and 3 hours". If a mother kills a child after it has taken its first breath in this world it is murder. Therefore, abortion is not murder to me. Abortion is not always about the mother. Sure, many times it is, but we must also acknowledge those cases where a child will be born with severe mental and/or physical disabilities.

You don't have to outlaw abortions in the event the unborn child will suffer severe and permanent disabilities to outlaw abortions where the mother just wants to shrug responsibility.

Your stance is that life begins when a child takes it's first breath? Really? That is just plain retarded.
Ya'll acting like you know what monster is
Me have 25 years in the monster biz
All monsters think you can fuss with this
Well you can talk to me Snuffleupagus
Me sneak into your house, me leave before dawn
Your daughters will be pregnant and your cookies will be gone
Image
Malx wrote:Make kids not cancer!
Psyko
The Irresistible
Posts: 5636
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 5:09 pm
ID: 0
Location: USA

Re: 10 Reasons The World Thinks The US Is Crazy Re: Abortion

Dovahkiin wrote:
Psyko wrote:My issues with the abortion debate:

Society cannot agree on the exact time when life starts.
Some say conception, others say heart beat, others still say brain activity, and the list goes on from there. Therefore, people against killing an unborn child simply agree it shouldn't happen. Thus, they all determine abortion should be illegal. Period. End of. Blanket statement.

The argument that life begins at conception is largely philosophical. Just as the argument that life begins at birth. Both are silly, but I would posit that the argument life begins at birth is just plain retarded.

Psyko wrote:Religious individuals and organizations forcing their ideals on other people.
Let me start by saying I was raised Christian in a democratic country. Something Christians and democratic countries have in common is the absolute need to force their lifestyle and opinions on others. I dispise these attributes.

A person should not go door to door and question another person's faith if it differs from their own. They should also not try to force laws upon a group of people within their society simply because they disagree with it. I understand many Christians believe conception is the beginning of life, gays are the devil, and all forms of contraception is murder because it prevents the potential life of a child. Granted, not all Christians believe all of those things. But if enough of them get together, they might be able to get it passed as law (see Santorum's religious convictions).

This is one of my biggest pet peeves. I cannot stand people who force their ideas on to other people. At least if abortion laws allow for a choice, the Christians and those against abortion can live how they like (ie not having an abortion if they become pregnant) while other people can live how they like (ie deciding to keep the child or abort).

I do want to say I am not meaning to single out Christians. I'm also against Muslims who believe non-Muslims should convert or die. I'm against salesmen who refuse to accept the fact that I don't need new siding on my house. I ignore people who tell me I shouldn't have painted my room red. I dispise children who feel the need to make other kids feel like less of a human being just so they can feel like more of a person. I am wholeheartedly against those nosey people who yack your ear off on a flight. Mostly, I hate everyone who impede on how I wish to live my life so long as how I live does not encroach on the lives of others.

And this is my issue with those that support abortion. The argument isn't, "oh well god said this" or that "my morals dictate that." It's that the unborn child is a living human being and that killing it is no different than killing someone that has been born. That murder laws should apply in both instances.

Psyko wrote:Inconsistencies in those who support abortion.
The major inconsistency is the "unless it is rape or incest" clause so many people like to add as if it makes them more humane. The reason for this inconsistency is these people do not want to be seen as unsympathetic to a victim. They don't want to be the "monster" who forced a woman to carry the child of the monster who attacked and brutally savaged her. So they have this wonderful clause to appease the masses and try to get them to support the bill because they truly aren't trying to force women to birth unwanted children. "See, there's a rape clause!" #-o

I agree that it's hypocritical to state that abortion is wrong unless it's for incest. Once again, I refuse to get into the debate regarding rape abortions. The subject really requires a discussion of it's own. There's so many angles to look at and discuss and the debate is sure to piss off just about everyone.

Also, I agree with you about the reasons that people support abortions for incest but not in most other cases. But not so much for the reasons that those who would support rape abortions but not abortions in other instances. Mostly because there's the whole mental health aspect.

Psyko wrote:I want people to pick a side. If murder is murder, then it counts all the time. If murder is only murder after the legal definition of life begins, then it counts only if the fetus has passed such a point. If abortion is not murder, then no prosecution can come to those who abort a fetus.

Murder is always murder. But killing someone isn't always murder. Murder has a definition ya know.

You're absolutely right that no prosecution can come if no crime is committed, no one is arguing any differently and murder is a legal concept. People seem to forget that.

Psyko wrote:I support abortion. A choice should be given. I believe life starts at birth. This is supported by medical cases where the doctor records the time of birth and time of death. Rick Santorum's child "lived for a few hours" not "for 10 months and 3 hours". If a mother kills a child after it has taken its first breath in this world it is murder. Therefore, abortion is not murder to me. Abortion is not always about the mother. Sure, many times it is, but we must also acknowledge those cases where a child will be born with severe mental and/or physical disabilities.

You don't have to outlaw abortions in the event the unborn child will suffer severe and permanent disabilities to outlaw abortions where the mother just wants to shrug responsibility.

Your stance is that life begins when a child takes it's first breath? Really? That is just plain retarded.

Yes, I believe life begins at birth. This is mostly because I have not found any sound medical conclusion to decide when life starts. I could find myself very easily agreeing with you that brain function is the beginning of life. I have not looked into mental development of a fetus and thus have not changed my opinion just yet. You can call me retarded, but I would prefer to admit ignorance. I've never really bothered to give it much study or thought. I was born 23 years ago ~ I've been alive 23 years. That is my current opinion, which is not set in stone.

I understand that killing someone isn't necessarily murder. However, many of the same people who spout "murder" regarding the abortion debate equate it to "taking an innocent life". A definition can be changed depending on the context, it was the "taking of a life" I was meaning to refer to. Not everyone is as logical as you when it comes to this topic, believe it or not.

I've seen no laws which take into consideration the potential child being born with a disability. I've seen no one in politics debating this issue even mention such cases. It's all abortion all the time...unless it's rape or incest. The unspoken truth is they also allow "medical emergency" abortions which are as of yet mostly undefined, but they overlook the health of the child. If the kid is going to be born with cerebral palsy, autism, and/or numerous other life-long disabilities, that should be taken into consideration during the pregnancy. Unfortunately, this part of the debate is not discussed.
愛美
Section Admin of
General and the GC
Image
Image
User avatar
doc holliday
Forum Elite
Posts: 1848
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 12:16 am
Alliance: Unnatural Selection
ID: 0
Location: Eurasia

Re: 10 Reasons The World Thinks The US Is Crazy Re: Abortion

Psyko wrote:Yes, I believe life begins at birth. This is mostly because I have not found any sound medical conclusion to decide when life starts.


If life begins at birth then what is a child before it is born? It is just as alive before it is born as when it is born is it not? Being alive is simply having life. So to think life begins at birth would be to say a child is not alive before it is born. Is that really what you mean? In every sense of the word, a child is alive before it is born just as much as you are alive right now.
Spoiler
Mathlord wrote:
doc holliday wrote:just don't come off ppt :smt071 :smt043
See what doc is really saying, is his six shooters tickle...until you die from it :D
Image
Spoiler
prsko wrote:
SSG EnterTheLion wrote: As anyone who knows me knows, I never build up planets, if I steal a good one, so be it, but I never waste naq on a planet.
So that triple planet u bought was allready built up?
Or am I twisting your words like the rest?
Psyko
The Irresistible
Posts: 5636
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 5:09 pm
ID: 0
Location: USA

Re: 10 Reasons The World Thinks The US Is Crazy Re: Abortion

doc holliday wrote:
Psyko wrote:Yes, I believe life begins at birth. This is mostly because I have not found any sound medical conclusion to decide when life starts.


If life begins at birth then what is a child before it is born? It is just as alive before it is born as when it is born is it not? Being alive is simply having life. So to think life begins at birth would be to say a child is not alive before it is born. Is that really what you mean? In every sense of the word, a child is alive before it is born just as much as you are alive right now.

Life can be defined as many things. Life can be cells with the ability to grow and replicate. It can be the period between birth and death. It can also be defined as mere existence.

A fetus before birth relies upon the health and bodily resources of the mother. It is only after birth when it can breathe on its own and has the potential for survival. While it still relies on the mother for sustenance and care, the child can survive for a time being away from the mother without death.
愛美
Section Admin of
General and the GC
Image
Image
Post Reply

Return to “General intelligent discussion topics”