Biologically, fetuses are really no better than parasites. It's about time everyone realized that.nervmeister
And you're just a parasite on this living, breathing planet... even now that you're out of the womb.
Should women have "the right" to end a pregnancy?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Argh why did you pick such a cliche non-rebuttal? But what if we ended up killing a baby Hitler or the next MAO ZE DONG? What if Pol-Pot's soul found its way into this gestating fetus over here? See how meaningless what you just said was? You asked how it affects me, in the "slightest" of ways. Right? Isn't that what you asked? Or not? Well I told you how it could affect me, And I hardly think any "hitlers" are going to be popping up in the U.S. with such tight governing. Man, I wonder how many brilliant minds were killed due to abortion, sad.[QUOTE="ScorpionBeeBee"]
[QUOTE="racer8dan"]What if Thomas Edison or George Washington Carvers parents aborted? Or any other person that have greatly benifited mankind? Yes it CAN affect ME.
racer8dan
You're right... we only get peopel like Manson, Gacy, and dahmer....There are awful peopel born everywhere. Maybe not to the same degree, but don't think it couldn't happen here..
Biologically, fetuses are really no better than parasites. It's about time everyone realized that.nervmeisterYeah OK Dr. House.
Because it wasn't his decision to make to "abort" the fetus.[QUOTE="mourninguser1"][QUOTE="Trollsters"] Havent thought of that, and yes it does! there have been many cases such as DUIs where a man was tried and sentanced for the death of an unborn baby. so why, was this not just considered an abortion?hartsickdiscipl
So why does the woman have the right to make that decision? Suppose the man who killed her and the unborn child were the father?
Because it's her body, her pregnancy, her child, and ultimately her life that is most affected by the decision either way.
What bigger slippery slope?[QUOTE="racer8dan"]
[QUOTE="binpink"]
In that instance it's a slippery slope in your mind. Those people have nothing to do with you or our country. There's an even bigger slippery slope possible if abortion is banned.
binpink
You can't think of anything at all that might arise? Interesting. I don't even know where to start about the problems and questions that will arise and need to be answered... some of which center on women's rights but clearly those aren't important.
Biologically, fetuses are really no better than parasites. It's about time everyone realized that.nervmeister
But by definition they are not, as they grow into adults over time and become independent. Parasites remain parasites indefinitely.
In the end, I give the nod to the woman. It's her body and she must be given control over her body. While morally I don't agree with abortion, I think it must be legal from a societal standpoint. It comes down to the rights of the mother versus the rights of the fetus.
[QUOTE="nervmeister"]Biologically, fetuses are really no better than parasites. It's about time everyone realized that.foxhound_fox
But by definition they are not, as they grow into adults over time and become independent. Parasites remain parasites indefinitely.
Plus parasites ALWAYS cause harm to the host. They're more of symbiotes if you REALLY want to be technical hahah
[QUOTE="mourninguser1"][QUOTE="Trollsters"] Because it wasn't his decision to make to "abort" the fetus.Trollstersah but dont u see? he was tried for murder but by your logic he only killed a bunch of cells. You're assuming I agree with him being tried for murder (for the fetus).
this living, breathing planet.hartsickdiscipllol Gaia hypothesis.
And this explains everything... he's one of those. Yeah, morality springing from religion is one of the biggest farces perpetrated on mankind. IT robs humanity of its triumphs and belittles the thousands of years it took us to get where we are, instead giving credit to some invisible tyrant in the sky. The world we live in today is order's of magnitude better than life was in ancient times. Just read the old testament if you want a taste of "god given" morality. You can beat slaves within inches of their life, for they are your property! Got a pesky daughter you want to get rid of? Sell her into bondage! Oldest son giving you lip? Gather the village elders and lets have us a good old stoning! Is your wife on her monthly period? Well she better be outside the city limits for the duration because she is unclean! And the shirt you are wearing better not be made of mixed fabrics, for that is an ABOMINATION to the lord! Just like a man lying with man is! Such wonderful god-given morality! NOw excuse me while i wretch into this bucket over here and praise Zeus that the ancient morals are finally hitting the trashbin of history.[QUOTE="ADF_Game"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]
You'll get no such reason from me. Without those 3 things our society wouldn't be here at all, and we'd be in total anarchy with no morals or laws. Laws were created because of morals, which have their roots in religion.
ScorpionBeeBee
It's very important to realize that specific laws that may have been in place thousands of years ago don't necessarily have a place or function today. The old testament was never meant to be a carbon-copy example of how to live our lives. The purpose of a conscience, and the value of having morals is what I get out of it.. The new testament is far more instructional to me.
It doesn't matter what "problems" may arise, it still doesn't justify the killing of the Innocent PERIODracer8danThat depends on how you frame the issue. Even if we accept that a foetus is still alive, that doesn't necessarily mean that it is entitled to the woman's body. You're assuming that bodily autonomy is a subservient right to life. But that isn't necessarily the case. Imagine if I were to kidnap you and hook you up to my dieing grandmother to keep her alive. Would you argue that I could sue you for trying to disconnect yourself? While this is not a perfect allegory to abortion, and I by no means maintain that it is; it shows that a reasonable person would admit that bodily autonomy can and often does override a right to life. The mere fact that a person has a right to life does not necessitate they have a right to a host. I say a woman should have the right to cut that sucker out. It is her body after all.
You asked how it affects me, in the "slightest" of ways. Right? Isn't that what you asked? Or not? Well I told you how it could affect me, And I hardly think any "hitlers" are going to be popping up in the U.S. with such tight governing. Man, I wonder how many brilliant minds were killed due to abortion, sad.[QUOTE="racer8dan"]
[QUOTE="ScorpionBeeBee"] Argh why did you pick such a cliche non-rebuttal? But what if we ended up killing a baby Hitler or the next MAO ZE DONG? What if Pol-Pot's soul found its way into this gestating fetus over here? See how meaningless what you just said was?
ArmoredAshes
You're right... we only get peopel like Manson, Gacy, and dahmer....There are awful peopel born everywhere. Maybe not to the same degree, but don't think it couldn't happen here..
Your philosophy is like cutting down an apple tree because you may get some bad ones.[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]
Because it wasn't his decision to make to "abort" the fetus.mourninguser1
So why does the woman have the right to make that decision? Suppose the man who killed her and the unborn child were the father?
Because it's her body, her pregnancy, her child, and ultimately her life that is most affected by the decision either way.
and its his dna and his sperm that made the baby. its his creation just as much as it is hers. as you pro choice people like to say so much, it takes two to tango.[QUOTE="binpink"]
[QUOTE="racer8dan"]What bigger slippery slope?
racer8dan
You can't think of anything at all that might arise? Interesting. I don't even know where to start about the problems and questions that will arise and need to be answered... some of which center on women's rights but clearly those aren't important.
Again, if you ever have a fetus inside you you have every right to determine for yourself if aborting it is killing or not, what I don't get is why people who are actually in that situation and whose choice won't affect you personally in the slightest but will affect them profoundly is any of your business at all, not to mention so important to you that you have to become so morally indignant about it.
[QUOTE="Trollsters"][QUOTE="mourninguser1"] ah but dont u see? he was tried for murder but by your logic he only killed a bunch of cells.mourninguser1You're assuming I agree with him being tried for murder (for the fetus).
this living, breathing planet.hartsickdiscipllol Gaia hypothesis.
Not as such. More an example of a bad analogy to match another one.
[QUOTE="nervmeister"]Biologically, fetuses are really no better than parasites. It's about time everyone realized that.foxhound_fox
But by definition they are not, as they grow into adults over time and become independent. Parasites remain parasites indefinitely. I don't like that argument, either. The real question about abortion is one of mother's rights versus fetus's rights. By trying to portray a fetus as some useless clump of cells and hence not life at all, I think people demean the value of life. The real issue is rights, not whether something is worth living.
Apparently you do need a lecture on property rights, it seems you dont understand them at all. "They don't apply when you voluntarily mate with someone," Yes they absolutely do :| "Most of the people in those southern states that you referred to understand the difference" Doubtful, considering most southerners I run into cant explain many things. "If someone comes onto my property uninvited" Stop right there, thats not the point. Even if you invite someone you have the right to get t hem off your property. If t hey wont leave then you can seek other means. I cant be way out if im right. Take some time and do a wikipedia search on property rights[QUOTE="Atheists_Pwn"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]
I live in Texas, and I don't need a lecture on property rights. They don't apply when you voluntarily mate with someone, knowing that you might get pregnant. Most of the people in those southern states that you referred to understand the difference. If someone comes onto my property uninvited and poses a threat to me, yeah.. I might have the right to shoot them. The fetus was NOT uninvited. It was willfully created inside the pregnant woman. Sorry man, even Texans know you don't have the right to shoot your kids on your own property. You're way out there on this one.
hartsickdiscipl
You just went 0 for 1000 on that. You made zero legitimate points. And zero moral points in any of your posts that I've read. Do you remember what I said about Atheists not having a sense of accountability in the other thread last week? This is exactly what I was talking about. Property rights DO NOT apply to human lives that you create inside your own body. You screw somebody, you might get pregnant. Be accountable. That's not punishement, that's cause and effect of your actions. Don't murder the unborn child to get off scott-free.
I really appreciate how you insulted southerners after trying to use one of the laws that is most common in the south in your own argument, too.. Real intelligent debating skills.
Actually I made perfectly legitimate points http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_ownership People who study philosophy try to make sense of their views, while it seems religious people just blindly follow whatevertheir emotions t ell them ;)[QUOTE="nervmeister"]Biologically, fetuses are really no better than parasites. It's about time everyone realized that.jeremiah06Yeah OK Dr. House. Yeah OK Father John.
[QUOTE="racer8dan"]
[QUOTE="binpink"]
You can't think of anything at all that might arise? Interesting. I don't even know where to start about the problems and questions that will arise and need to be answered... some of which center on women's rights but clearly those aren't important.
Again, if you ever have a fetus inside you you have every right to determine for yourself if aborting it is killing or not, what I don't get is why people who are actually in that situation and whose choice won't affect you personally in the slightest but will affect them profoundly is any of your business at all, not to mention so important to you that you have to become so morally indignant about it.
because its morally wrong to MURDER someone. especailly someone that does not have a voice to make their opinion known, someone has to stand up for them.They're more of symbiotes if you REALLY want to be technical hahahArmoredAshes
This is true. Many organisms also benefit from symbiotes.
It doesn't matter what "problems" may arise, it still doesn't justify the killing of the Innocent PERIOD[QUOTE="racer8dan"]
[QUOTE="binpink"]
You can't think of anything at all that might arise? Interesting. I don't even know where to start about the problems and questions that will arise and need to be answered... some of which center on women's rights but clearly those aren't important.
theone86
Again, if you ever have a fetus inside you you have every right to determine for yourself if aborting it is killing or not, what I don't get is why people who are actually in that situation and whose choice won't affect you personally in the slightest but will affect them profoundly is any of your business at all, not to mention so important to you that you have to become so morally indignant about it.
That's like saying that I have to have had something stolen from me to know whether or not stealing is wrong. No, it's just wrong. Period.
Not as such. More an example of a bad analogy to match another one.hartsickdisciplTwo wrongs ed cetera.
[QUOTE="theone86"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]
So why does the woman have the right to make that decision? Suppose the man who killed her and the unborn child were the father?
Trollsters
Because it's her body, her pregnancy, her child, and ultimately her life that is most affected by the decision either way.
and its his dna and his sperm that made the baby. its his creation just as much as it is hers. as you pro choice people like to say so much, it takes two to tango.Well maybe he should know her stance on abortion before he sleps with her. He's not the one who has to spend nine months carrying the child, being sick in the morning, dealing with insaitable hunger, having everyday tasks become menial, and having to split his private open to give birth to the child. I don't really think it's a good thing if a couple can't reach a consensus on the issue, but I do believe that ultimately the decision is the mother's as it is her body.
[QUOTE="binpink"]
[QUOTE="Trollsters"] The women in my life agree with me. i dont associate with people that belive murder is ok, not my type of crowd.jeremiah06
Good, and totally practical too. Saves women like me from having to deal with someone who looks at us and sees a big "property of the U.S. government" stamped on our foreheads.
"Given the choice"... but you don't want choice. Banning abortion removes choice so since the woman isn't being given the choice, life shouldn't be preferred over death, by that logic. I can come to terms with ending the life of an unborn baby in several ways, and I don't feel like it's anything I really have to come to terms with. A pro-life stance supports sexism even if you don't like to think about that part. I don't think a woman should be risking pregnancy if she is absolutely certain she'll have an abortion but in no way will I force her into anything. That's not my place and not my business. You can't say you couldn't care less about what I do with my body then continue with a but. You do care. And you shouldn't because it's none of your business. You might care but it's not actually anything you're involved with. And I don't know what you're talking about with telling women not to sell their bodies- prostitution?
[QUOTE="nervmeister"]Biologically, fetuses are really no better than parasites. It's about time everyone realized that.hartsickdiscipl
And you're just a parasite on this living, breathing planet... even now that you're out of the womb.
Don't worry. I just realized that I was wrong in saying that fetuses are no better than parasites........because unlike parasites, we can harvest fetuses for stem cells which we use for medical research and therapy. So they're definitely more useful than parasites. They'd sure help a guy like me get better in a hurry.[QUOTE="Trollsters"][QUOTE="theone86"]
Because it's her body, her pregnancy, her child, and ultimately her life that is most affected by the decision either way.
and its his dna and his sperm that made the baby. its his creation just as much as it is hers. as you pro choice people like to say so much, it takes two to tango.Well maybe he should know her stance on abortion before he sleps with her. He's not the one who has to spend nine months carrying the child, being sick in the morning, dealing with insaitable hunger, having everyday tasks become menial, and having to split his private open to give birth to the child. I don't really think it's a good thing if a couple can't reach a consensus on the issue, but I do believe that ultimately the decision is the mother's as it is her body.
lol yea because thats a topic that comes up in conversation on a date..... again i say. the mother should make a decision to close her legs if she does not want to get pregnant.[QUOTE="ArmoredAshes"]They're more of symbiotes if you REALLY want to be technical hahah
foxhound_fox
This is true. Many organisms also benefit from symbiotes.Hey, if my unborn child can help me take down Spider-man, then I'll eat every word I've said here so far. :P
[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"][QUOTE="Atheists_Pwn"] Apparently you do need a lecture on property rights, it seems you dont understand them at all. "They don't apply when you voluntarily mate with someone," Yes they absolutely do :| "Most of the people in those southern states that you referred to understand the difference" Doubtful, considering most southerners I run into cant explain many things. "If someone comes onto my property uninvited" Stop right there, thats not the point. Even if you invite someone you have the right to get t hem off your property. If t hey wont leave then you can seek other means. I cant be way out if im right. Take some time and do a wikipedia search on property rightsAtheists_Pwn
You just went 0 for 1000 on that. You made zero legitimate points. And zero moral points in any of your posts that I've read. Do you remember what I said about Atheists not having a sense of accountability in the other thread last week? This is exactly what I was talking about. Property rights DO NOT apply to human lives that you create inside your own body. You screw somebody, you might get pregnant. Be accountable. That's not punishement, that's cause and effect of your actions. Don't murder the unborn child to get off scott-free.
I really appreciate how you insulted southerners after trying to use one of the laws that is most common in the south in your own argument, too.. Real intelligent debating skills.
Actually I made perfectly legitimate points http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_ownership People who study philosophy try to make sense of their views, while it seems religious people just blindly follow whatevertheir emotions t ell them ;)I have learned that the value of life cannot be quantified, both through philosophical study and religious beliefs. I believe that a person cannot live their life to it's fullest without a combination of science and a belief in something greater, something they cannot see. I didn't need wikipedia to teach me that, but you seem to.
[QUOTE="theone86"]
[QUOTE="racer8dan"]It doesn't matter what "problems" may arise, it still doesn't justify the killing of the Innocent PERIOD
hartsickdiscipl
Again, if you ever have a fetus inside you you have every right to determine for yourself if aborting it is killing or not, what I don't get is why people who are actually in that situation and whose choice won't affect you personally in the slightest but will affect them profoundly is any of your business at all, not to mention so important to you that you have to become so morally indignant about it.
That's like saying that I have to have had something stolen from me to know whether or not stealing is wrong. No, it's just wrong. Period.
Things are wrong for a reason, not just because. With that logic I can say anything is wrong, "oh tying your shoes that way is wrong, why? It just is," sorry doesn't work that way. Stealing is wrong because it negatively affects someone else, they have a right to their possessions and stealing is infringing upon that right, just as women have a right to determine the morality of abortion for themselves and forcing a decision upon them is infringing upon their right to determine their own morality.
and its his dna and his sperm that made the baby. its his creation just as much as it is hers. as you pro choice people like to say so much, it takes two to tango.[QUOTE="Trollsters"][QUOTE="theone86"]
Because it's her body, her pregnancy, her child, and ultimately her life that is most affected by the decision either way.
theone86
Well maybe he should know her stance on abortion before he sleps with her. He's not the one who has to spend nine months carrying the child, being sick in the morning, dealing with insaitable hunger, having everyday tasks become menial, and having to split his private open to give birth to the child. I don't really think it's a good thing if a couple can't reach a consensus on the issue, but I do believe that ultimately the decision is the mother's as it is her body.
Are you really going for heart wrenching? Really? I could go on and on for pages and pages about the simple joys they unborn could/would have if allowed to live... The fact is this woman with all her bodily rights can't engage in sexual acts(utilizing her own body) for money so she should be allowed to kill(and yes Its murder and not a single argument brought against it shall be heard nor considered).[QUOTE="theone86"][QUOTE="Trollsters"] and its his dna and his sperm that made the baby. its his creation just as much as it is hers. as you pro choice people like to say so much, it takes two to tango.Trollsters
Well maybe he should know her stance on abortion before he sleps with her. He's not the one who has to spend nine months carrying the child, being sick in the morning, dealing with insaitable hunger, having everyday tasks become menial, and having to split his private open to give birth to the child. I don't really think it's a good thing if a couple can't reach a consensus on the issue, but I do believe that ultimately the decision is the mother's as it is her body.
lol yea because thats a topic that comes up in conversation on a date..... again i say. the mother should make a decision to close her legs if she does not want to get pregnant.This has always been the answer that nobody wants to accept.. The simplest and most infallible answer of all.
[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]
[QUOTE="mourninguser1"] Because it wasn't his decision to make to "abort" the fetus.theone86
So why does the woman have the right to make that decision? Suppose the man who killed her and the unborn child were the father?
Because it's her body, her pregnancy, her child, and ultimately her life that is most affected by the decision either way.
IT would affect the child more because they are the ones dying.[QUOTE="ArmoredAshes"][QUOTE="racer8dan"] You asked how it affects me, in the "slightest" of ways. Right? Isn't that what you asked? Or not? Well I told you how it could affect me, And I hardly think any "hitlers" are going to be popping up in the U.S. with such tight governing. Man, I wonder how many brilliant minds were killed due to abortion, sad.
racer8dan
You're right... we only get peopel like Manson, Gacy, and dahmer....There are awful peopel born everywhere. Maybe not to the same degree, but don't think it couldn't happen here..
Your philosophy is like cutting down an apple tree because you may get some bad ones.Never anywhere did I state that abortions should be done based on the fact the person may be bad or good. I was just pointing out that bad people pop up in the US as well as anywhere else in the world.
[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]
[QUOTE="theone86"]
Again, if you ever have a fetus inside you you have every right to determine for yourself if aborting it is killing or not, what I don't get is why people who are actually in that situation and whose choice won't affect you personally in the slightest but will affect them profoundly is any of your business at all, not to mention so important to you that you have to become so morally indignant about it.
That's like saying that I have to have had something stolen from me to know whether or not stealing is wrong. No, it's just wrong. Period.
Things are wrong for a reason, not just because. With that logic I can say anything is wrong, "oh tying your shoes that way is wrong, why? It just is," sorry doesn't work that way. Stealing is wrong because it negatively affects someone else, they have a right to their possessions and stealing is infringing upon that right, just as women have a right to determine the morality of abortion for themselves and forcing a decision upon them is infringing upon their right to determine their own morality.
by that logic, it should be my choice to kill someone to get a job promotion, as the person in the position ahead of me is adversly affecting my life. murder is murder.
lol yea because thats a topic that comes up in conversation on a date..... again i say. the mother should make a decision to close her legs if she does not want to get pregnant.[QUOTE="Trollsters"][QUOTE="theone86"]
Well maybe he should know her stance on abortion before he sleps with her. He's not the one who has to spend nine months carrying the child, being sick in the morning, dealing with insaitable hunger, having everyday tasks become menial, and having to split his private open to give birth to the child. I don't really think it's a good thing if a couple can't reach a consensus on the issue, but I do believe that ultimately the decision is the mother's as it is her body.
hartsickdiscipl
This has always been the answer that nobody wants to accept.. The simplest and most infallible answer of all.
But in case that doesn't work, that's when abortion comes in handy.*sigh* No one is saying nor implying that. All we're saying is that given the choice, life should be preferred over death. If the only way you can come to terms with ending the life of an unborn child is by claiming everyone pro-life is sexist then fine delude yourself, but why take the risk of getting pregnant if you're just going to abort anyway? I know that if I somehow lost my job I could draw unemployment, but that doesn't mean I should start dropping f-bombs in-front of my boss either. I couldn't care less what you do to your own body its yours, you have rights to it as you please. However, when your rights start to negatively effect someone else's life then I care. Furthermore, we can completely tell a woman not to sell her body(which she has all these rights to) right? But according to your views I'm a sexist pig for those thoughts huh?[QUOTE="jeremiah06"]
[QUOTE="binpink"]
Good, and totally practical too. Saves women like me from having to deal with someone who looks at us and sees a big "property of the U.S. government" stamped on our foreheads.
binpink
"Given the choice"... but you don't want choice. Banning abortion removes choice so since the woman isn't being given the choice, life shouldn't be preferred over death, by that logic. I can come to terms with ending the life of an unborn baby in several ways, and I don't feel like it's anything I really have to come to terms with. A pro-life stance supports sexism even if you don't like to think about that part. I don't think a woman should be risking pregnancy if she is absolutely certain she'll have an abortion but in no way will I force her into anything. That's not my place and not my business. You can't say you couldn't care less about what I do with my body then continue with a but. You do care. And you shouldn't because it's none of your business. You might care but it's not actually anything you're involved with. And I don't know what you're talking about with telling women not to sell their bodies- prostitution?
What you do with your body ISN'T any of my business. But when it involves terminatation of child it IS, because the child cannot defend himself, its dependent on someone to defend for him/her.[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]
[QUOTE="ArmoredAshes"]They're more of symbiotes if you REALLY want to be technical hahah
nervmeister
This is true. Many organisms also benefit from symbiotes.Hey, if my unborn child can help me take down Spider-man, then I'll eat every word I've said here so far. :P
See, you convince him not to hurt you because you're pregnant. Then when his guard is down you pull out the can of RAID and finish him off.
[QUOTE="binpink"]
[QUOTE="racer8dan"]What bigger slippery slope?
racer8dan
You can't think of anything at all that might arise? Interesting. I don't even know where to start about the problems and questions that will arise and need to be answered... some of which center on women's rights but clearly those aren't important.
Boy those capital letters sure told me. I disgaree with your opinion there (yes it's an opinion, no it's not a fact). You may dismiss the issues easily because it's easier to be completely blind to what you're really doing to people but that doesn't make them go away.
[QUOTE="theone86"][QUOTE="Trollsters"] and its his dna and his sperm that made the baby. its his creation just as much as it is hers. as you pro choice people like to say so much, it takes two to tango.Trollsters
Well maybe he should know her stance on abortion before he sleps with her. He's not the one who has to spend nine months carrying the child, being sick in the morning, dealing with insaitable hunger, having everyday tasks become menial, and having to split his private open to give birth to the child. I don't really think it's a good thing if a couple can't reach a consensus on the issue, but I do believe that ultimately the decision is the mother's as it is her body.
lol yea because thats a topic that comes up in conversation on a date..... again i say. the mother should make a decision to close her legs if she does not want to get pregnant.Because it's always a matter of closing her legs, not a matter of being raped or taken advantadge of or using defective condoms, or any number of things that can go wrong. And it's the woman who's responsible, not the man, funny how that works. How about this, if you're worried about it use a condom, if you're more worried tell her you want to wait until she's on the pill, if the 99.9% chance of her not getting pregnant from those two isn't enough for you then how about the MAN decides not to have sex with her. If you're morally opposed to abortion it's your decision to not have sex regardless of your gender if it's that important to you. If not, then use protection and hope she doesn't get pregnant and abort it.
[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]
That's like saying that I have to have had something stolen from me to know whether or not stealing is wrong. No, it's just wrong. Period.
Things are wrong for a reason, not just because. With that logic I can say anything is wrong, "oh tying your shoes that way is wrong, why? It just is," sorry doesn't work that way. Stealing is wrong because it negatively affects someone else, they have a right to their possessions and stealing is infringing upon that right, just as women have a right to determine the morality of abortion for themselves and forcing a decision upon them is infringing upon their right to determine their own morality.
by that logic, it should be my choice to kill someone to get a job promotion, as the person in the position ahead of me is adversly affecting my life. .From inside your own body? :?[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]
[QUOTE="theone86"]
Again, if you ever have a fetus inside you you have every right to determine for yourself if aborting it is killing or not, what I don't get is why people who are actually in that situation and whose choice won't affect you personally in the slightest but will affect them profoundly is any of your business at all, not to mention so important to you that you have to become so morally indignant about it.
theone86
That's like saying that I have to have had something stolen from me to know whether or not stealing is wrong. No, it's just wrong. Period.
Things are wrong for a reason, not just because. With that logic I can say anything is wrong, "oh tying your shoes that way is wrong, why? It just is," sorry doesn't work that way. Stealing is wrong because it negatively affects someone else, they have a right to their possessions and stealing is infringing upon that right, just as women have a right to determine the morality of abortion for themselves and forcing a decision upon them is infringing upon their right to determine their own morality.
I agree that things are wrong for a reason. Aborting a life that's already forming is negatively affecting the unborn child. You can't negatively affect something much worse than killing it. This doesn't even take into consideration the sense of responsibility that both potential parents should accept before they screw each other. For them to know that creating a child is a possible (and naturally intended) consequence of their actions, and then decide that they don't want to deal with the sacred creation that results, is another sin against nature, and I believe against God.
I agree that things are wrong for a reason. Aborting a life that's already forming is negatively affecting the unborn child. You can't negatively affect something much worse than killing it. This doesn't even take into consideration the sense of responsibility that both potential parents should accept before they screw each other. For them to know that creating a child is a possible (and naturally intended) consequence of their actions, and then decide that they don't want to deal with the sacred creation that results, is another sin against nature, and I believe against God. hartsickdisciplSo? Its my body, not God's!
*sigh* No one is saying nor implying that. All we're saying is that given the choice, life should be preferred over death. If the only way you can come to terms with ending the life of an unborn child is by claiming everyone pro-life is sexist then fine delude yourself, but why take the risk of getting pregnant if you're just going to abort anyway? I know that if I somehow lost my job I could draw unemployment, but that doesn't mean I should start dropping f-bombs in-front of my boss either. I couldn't care less what you do to your own body its yours, you have rights to it as you please. However, when your rights start to negatively effect someone else's life then I care. Furthermore, we can completely tell a woman not to sell her body(which she has all these rights to) right? But according to your views I'm a sexist pig for those thoughts huh?[QUOTE="jeremiah06"]
[QUOTE="binpink"]
Good, and totally practical too. Saves women like me from having to deal with someone who looks at us and sees a big "property of the U.S. government" stamped on our foreheads.
binpink
"Given the choice"... but you don't want choice. Banning abortion removes choice so since the woman isn't being given the choice, life shouldn't be preferred over death, by that logic. I can come to terms with ending the life of an unborn baby in several ways, and I don't feel like it's anything I really have to come to terms with. A pro-life stance supports sexism even if you don't like to think about that part. I don't think a woman should be risking pregnancy if she is absolutely certain she'll have an abortion but in no way will I force her into anything. That's not my place and not my business. You can't say you couldn't care less about what I do with my body then continue with a but. You do care. And you shouldn't because it's none of your business. You might care but it's not actually anything you're involved with. And I don't know what you're talking about with telling women not to sell their bodies- prostitution?
Yeah, just like I don't care about you pursuing happiness unless it infringes on the rights of others... There is always a but. But hey I shouldn't care just like the law shouldn't care about pedophiles rapping kids(its not our business right?). The point I'm making is a woman can't legally become a prostitute, but she can abort? How backwards is that?[QUOTE="Trollsters"][QUOTE="theone86"]by that logic, it should be my choice to kill someone to get a job promotion, as the person in the position ahead of me is adversly affecting my life. .From inside your own body? :?Things are wrong for a reason, not just because. With that logic I can say anything is wrong, "oh tying your shoes that way is wrong, why? It just is," sorry doesn't work that way. Stealing is wrong because it negatively affects someone else, they have a right to their possessions and stealing is infringing upon that right, just as women have a right to determine the morality of abortion for themselves and forcing a decision upon them is infringing upon their right to determine their own morality.
nervmeister
In my opinion the fact that 2 people decided to have sex and take the obvious risk that she might get pregnant takes away the mother's "right" based on the fact that the child is inside her body. Of course it's inside her body, she and the man she had sex with put it there! Let's not use the "oh.. it's part of my body so I have the RIGHT" cop-out. Yeah, it wouldn't have been part of her body if she'd kept her legs closed.
Yeah, just like I don't care about you pursuing happiness unless it infringes on the rights of others... There is always a but. But hey I shouldn't care just like the law shouldn't care about pedophiles rapping kids(its not our business right?). The point I'm making is a woman can't legally become a prostitute, but she can abort? How backwards is that?jeremiah06Mitigating, secular state interest involved in prostitution; federal income tax. There are, however, some states which do allow for legal prostitution; Nevada and Arizona.
[QUOTE="theone86"]
[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]
That's like saying that I have to have had something stolen from me to know whether or not stealing is wrong. No, it's just wrong. Period.
hartsickdiscipl
Things are wrong for a reason, not just because. With that logic I can say anything is wrong, "oh tying your shoes that way is wrong, why? It just is," sorry doesn't work that way. Stealing is wrong because it negatively affects someone else, they have a right to their possessions and stealing is infringing upon that right, just as women have a right to determine the morality of abortion for themselves and forcing a decision upon them is infringing upon their right to determine their own morality.
I agree that things are wrong for a reason. Aborting a life that's already forming is negatively affecting the unborn child. You can't negatively affect something much worse than killing it. This doesn't even take into consideration the sense of responsibility that both potential parents should accept before they screw each other. For them to know that creating a child is a possible (and naturally intended) consequence of their actions, and then decide that they don't want to deal with the sacred creation that results, is another sin against nature, and I believe against God.
Like I said before, whoever thinks creating human life is sacred and holy hasn't met Octo-mom.lol yea because thats a topic that comes up in conversation on a date..... again i say. the mother should make a decision to close her legs if she does not want to get pregnant.[QUOTE="Trollsters"][QUOTE="theone86"]
Well maybe he should know her stance on abortion before he sleps with her. He's not the one who has to spend nine months carrying the child, being sick in the morning, dealing with insaitable hunger, having everyday tasks become menial, and having to split his private open to give birth to the child. I don't really think it's a good thing if a couple can't reach a consensus on the issue, but I do believe that ultimately the decision is the mother's as it is her body.
hartsickdiscipl
This has always been the answer that nobody wants to accept.. The simplest and most infallible answer of all.
That is the main solution, If they ignore it, then I don't want to here about women's "rights" when concerning this subject.[QUOTE="binpink"]
[QUOTE="jeremiah06"] *sigh* No one is saying nor implying that. All we're saying is that given the choice, life should be preferred over death. If the only way you can come to terms with ending the life of an unborn child is by claiming everyone pro-life is sexist then fine delude yourself, but why take the risk of getting pregnant if you're just going to abort anyway? I know that if I somehow lost my job I could draw unemployment, but that doesn't mean I should start dropping f-bombs in-front of my boss either. I couldn't care less what you do to your own body its yours, you have rights to it as you please. However, when your rights start to negatively effect someone else's life then I care. Furthermore, we can completely tell a woman not to sell her body(which she has all these rights to) right? But according to your views I'm a sexist pig for those thoughts huh?
racer8dan
"Given the choice"... but you don't want choice. Banning abortion removes choice so since the woman isn't being given the choice, life shouldn't be preferred over death, by that logic. I can come to terms with ending the life of an unborn baby in several ways, and I don't feel like it's anything I really have to come to terms with. A pro-life stance supports sexism even if you don't like to think about that part. I don't think a woman should be risking pregnancy if she is absolutely certain she'll have an abortion but in no way will I force her into anything. That's not my place and not my business. You can't say you couldn't care less about what I do with my body then continue with a but. You do care. And you shouldn't because it's none of your business. You might care but it's not actually anything you're involved with. And I don't know what you're talking about with telling women not to sell their bodies- prostitution?
What you do with your body ISN'T any of my business. But when it involves terminatation of child it IS, because the child cannot defend himself, its dependent on someone to defend for him/her.Who decided unborn children need or should be given representation? A child you'd have no legal claim to anyway? MY child? No, that's not your business. You may want to believe it is but I guarantee you if you come to my home and try to make any of my children do something, or in any way affect a child I was pregnant with, you'd be in the wrong. That fetus isn't yours to speak or act for.
In my opinion the fact that 2 people decided to have sex and take the obvious risk that she might get pregnant takes away the mother's "right" based on the fact that the child is inside her body. Of course it's inside her body, she and the man she had sex with put it there! Let's not use the "oh.. it's part of my body so I have the RIGHT" cop-out. Yeah, it wouldn't have been part of her body if she'd kept her legs closed.hartsickdisciplThe mere fact that the agent's actions was the proximate cause of the event does not necessitate that they assume responsibility for the act. Merely because I leave a door unlocked does not mean I am responsible for a thief which breaks into mine home and steals things. Nor does it mean that I am responsible for a wasp which happens to fly through the screening, sting my allergic grandmother, and kill her. While these aren't perfect analogies to abortion, and I by no means maintain that they are, they do show that proximate cause does not necessitate responsibility. Given that in some other instances it doesn't, why should it here?
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment