Current Events > Whether you are for or against abortion

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3
Vindris_SNH 09/16/17 9:25:03 PM #205:	@Asherlee10 Quick bump for you. --- glitteringfairy: Just build the damn wall ThyCorndog: and how exactly will that stop the mexican space program from orbital dropping illegal immigrants? <cite>Vindris_SNH posted [p:886735152] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote>@Asherlee10 Quick bump for you.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#206	Post #206 was unavailable or deleted.
mortimerjames 09/17/17 11:24:10 AM #207:	Abortion should be viable up until abortion and birth overlap. --- Tell me the story about how people used to believe in the Bible - Future kid to their grandparents <cite>mortimerjames posted [p:886761303] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote>Abortion should be viable up until abortion and birth overlap.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
NepGear462 09/17/17 12:35:58 PM #208:	I'm for requiring a license to have children. <cite>NepGear462 posted [p:886764279] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote>I'm for requiring a license to have children.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 09/17/17 12:59:24 PM #209:	NepGear462 posted... I'm for requiring a license to have children. This is an excellent idea. --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:886765385] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>NepGear462 posted...</cite> <quote>I'm for requiring a license to have children.</quote> This is an excellent idea.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Vindris_SNH 09/18/17 8:56:13 AM #210:	Asherlee10 posted... @Vindris_SNH posted... @Asherlee10 Quick bump for you. Thanks - Let's try to keep this around until Monday please. It's Monday! My final bump here. If you're good on where we left the discussion that's fine with me and we can leave it at that for now. Otherwise we can pick up where we left off. Regardless, I'm sure we'll be discussing this issue together again in future threads. --- glitteringfairy: Just build the damn wall ThyCorndog: and how exactly will that stop the mexican space program from orbital dropping illegal immigrants? <cite>Vindris_SNH posted [p:886815781] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Asherlee10 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>@Vindris_SNH posted...</cite> <quote>@Asherlee10 Quick bump for you.</quote> Thanks - Let's try to keep this around until Monday please.</quote> It's Monday! My final bump here. If you're good on where we left the discussion that's fine with me and we can leave it at that for now. Otherwise we can pick up where we left off. Regardless, I'm sure we'll be discussing this issue together again in future threads.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#211	Post #211 was unavailable or deleted.
Jiggy101011 09/18/17 9:55:06 AM #212:	I thought the topic was going to be "Whether you are for or against abortion... can we all agree that men shouldn't be making these laws?" Because then that would be a better conversation to have then the religion one you guys were having. --- Gamertag: F1RE v2 PSN ID: F1REx Man got me a 9 and she sexy. <cite>Jiggy101011 posted [p:886817658] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote>I thought the topic was going to be "Whether you are for or against abortion... can we all agree that men shouldn't be making these laws?" Because then that would be a better conversation to have then the religion one you guys were having.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#213	Post #213 was unavailable or deleted.
ChromaticAngel 09/18/17 9:58:59 AM #214:	Jiggy101011 posted... I thought the topic was going to be "Whether you are for or against abortion... can we all agree that men shouldn't be making these laws?" Because then that would be a better conversation to have then the religion one you guys were having. I was more going for "can we not destroy the entire medical profession just to get at abortion?" but the thread is evident that people don't care what gets destroyed in the process of legislating abortion. People will literally approve fascist dictators if they were convinced that it's what was needed to ban abortion. --- https://puu.sh/tcLsT/24f4611235.png <cite>ChromaticAngel posted [p:886817819] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Jiggy101011 posted...</cite> <quote>I thought the topic was going to be "Whether you are for or against abortion... can we all agree that men shouldn't be making these laws?" Because then that would be a better conversation to have then the religion one you guys were having.</quote> I was more going for "can we not destroy the entire medical profession just to get at abortion?" but the thread is evident that people don't care what gets destroyed in the process of legislating abortion. People will literally approve fascist dictators if they were convinced that it's what was needed to ban abortion.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Vindris_SNH 09/18/17 10:05:06 AM #215:	@Asherlee10 posted... @Vindris_SNH posted... The pro-choicer: Yes, a human life begins at conception. But that human life, in its earliest stages of development, has not attained personhood; that is, it does not scientifically have the capacity to experience awareness, pain, feelings, or emotions, which are qualities we assign to actual persons who are granted basic rights. No harm is being done to a human fetus when it is terminated, because it does not possess the ability to experience physical or emotional pain. The pro-lifer: Human life begins at conception. There should be no stipulation for granting the most basic rights to any human who has a future. Level of dependency and stage of development should have no bearing on whether a human is granted the right to life. Abortion is a disruption of normal human development. We should not assign rights to humans based on the developmental stage they are currently in. By doing this, we are denying the unborn their futures as fully developed members of the human race. Okay, I'll point out what I think could be logical issues with both stances in this instance. PC Argument: I think the premise "human life begins at conception" is unproven which means we cannot logically move to a conclusion. I think that personhood is attempted to be assigned in tandem with viability. Meaning, when a human fetus is able to survive outside of the womb, the fetus can be assigned personhood and inherits a right to life. -- Still a major debate about personhood and if viability is the best choice for assigning it. PL Argument: Again, the premises "human life begins at conception" might only hold weight if a religious stance is taken. We run into the same issues as the PC argument. With the religious stance, that would be combatted with scientific rebuttal. AND we cannot logically reach the conclusion here because of the questionable premises. Additionally, the "potential for life" argument can be a slippery slope argument. All in all, Vindris, as you said there is really no meeting point between each side and we all ultimately reach an impasse. It's possible that a good way to start a discussion about abortion is to try to agree on the terms involved. Right-to-life, personhood, human life, etc. I had addressed the "human life" question in a previous post that you might have missed. Let me ask you these questions again. Of course there is more to it (scientifically) than this, but here are two simple questions that, when answered, might lead you to understand that human life starts at conception... 1 - What species is a newly conceived human zygote part of? 2 - Is it alive? --- glitteringfairy: Just build the damn wall ThyCorndog: and how exactly will that stop the mexican space program from orbital dropping illegal immigrants? <cite>Vindris_SNH posted [p:886818051] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>@Asherlee10 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>@Vindris_SNH posted...</cite> <cite>The pro-choicer:</cite> <quote>Yes, a human life begins at conception. But that human life, in its earliest stages of development, has not attained personhood; that is, it does not scientifically have the capacity to experience awareness, pain, feelings, or emotions, which are qualities we assign to actual persons who are granted basic rights. No harm is being done to a human fetus when it is terminated, because it does not possess the ability to experience physical or emotional pain.</quote> <cite>The pro-lifer:</cite> <quote>Human life begins at conception. There should be no stipulation for granting the most basic rights to any human who has a future. Level of dependency and stage of development should have no bearing on whether a human is granted the right to life. Abortion is a disruption of normal human development. We should not assign rights to humans based on the developmental stage they are currently in. By doing this, we are denying the unborn their futures as fully developed members of the human race.</quote> Okay, I'll point out what I think could be logical issues with both stances in this instance. PC Argument: I think the premise "human life begins at conception" is unproven which means we cannot logically move to a conclusion. I think that personhood is attempted to be assigned in tandem with viability. Meaning, when a human fetus is able to survive outside of the womb, the fetus can be assigned personhood and inherits a right to life. -- Still a major debate about personhood and if viability is the best choice for assigning it. PL Argument: Again, the premises "human life begins at conception" might only hold weight if a religious stance is taken. We run into the same issues as the PC argument. With the religious stance, that would be combatted with scientific rebuttal. AND we cannot logically reach the conclusion here because of the questionable premises. Additionally, the "potential for life" argument can be a slippery slope argument. All in all, Vindris, as you said there is really no meeting point between each side and we all ultimately reach an impasse. It's possible that a good way to start a discussion about abortion is to try to agree on the terms involved. Right-to-life, personhood, human life, etc.</quote> I had addressed the "human life" question in a previous post that you might have missed. Let me ask you these questions again. Of course there is more to it (scientifically) than this, but here are two simple questions that, when answered, might lead you to understand that human life starts at conception... 1 - What species is a newly conceived human zygote part of? 2 - Is it alive?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Sinroth 09/18/17 10:21:41 AM #216:	Alongside what Vindris just said, I just want to point out two other things. 1) Is there really a difference between "human person" and "human being"? Is this distinction ever used except when justifying why it is OK to destroy a human being? 2) Viability is vague. You put a zygote out of the womb and it will die near-instantly. You leave a baby out of the womb and it will die after a few days. Neither is really independently viable, yet presumably a baby can't be killed, while a foetus can. The same thing also applies as above; do we ever use this argument of viability in any other situation except when we're trying to justify why it is OK to destroy a human being? Viability also depends on your ability to provide childcare. Since Roe vs. Wade, the date for viability has been pushed back and back, so this argument would have to admit that foetuses who once could have been aborted, no longer can be. Are you suggesting that the right-to-life is granted by our ability to look after a foetus or person? Why would a 1 week foetus in poverty-stricken South Sudan be less deserving of life than a 1 week foetus in first-world Austria? They're both exactly the same kind of thing. --- I live in a big house and it's handy to have a pair of running shoes so that it doesn't take me forever to get from one area of the house to another. <cite>Sinroth posted [p:886818712] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote>Alongside what Vindris just said, I just want to point out two other things. 1) Is there really a difference between "human person" and "human being"? Is this distinction ever used except when justifying why it is OK to destroy a human being? 2) Viability is vague. You put a zygote out of the womb and it will die near-instantly. You leave a baby out of the womb and it will die after a few days. Neither is really independently viable, yet presumably a baby can't be killed, while a foetus can. The same thing also applies as above; do we ever use this argument of viability in any other situation except when we're trying to justify why it is OK to destroy a human being? Viability also depends on your ability to provide childcare. Since Roe vs. Wade, the date for viability has been pushed back and back, so this argument would have to admit that foetuses who once could have been aborted, no longer can be. Are you suggesting that the right-to-life is granted by our ability to look after a foetus or person? Why would a 1 week foetus in poverty-stricken South Sudan be less deserving of life than a 1 week foetus in first-world Austria? They're both exactly the same kind of thing.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Vindris_SNH 09/18/17 10:40:14 AM #217:	What happens when we have working artificial wombs? Then the baby is viable outside of the mother's womb from the moment of conception, because of technology. Is the zygote then considered a person because it can survive outside the mother's womb? --- glitteringfairy: Just build the damn wall ThyCorndog: and how exactly will that stop the mexican space program from orbital dropping illegal immigrants? <cite>Vindris_SNH posted [p:886819480] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote>What happens when we have working artificial wombs? Then the baby is viable outside of the mother's womb from the moment of conception, because of technology. Is the zygote then considered a person because it can survive outside the mother's womb?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#218	Post #218 was unavailable or deleted.
ChromaticAngel 09/18/17 10:56:31 AM #219:	Vindris_SNH posted... What happens when we have working artificial wombs? Then the baby is viable outside of the mother's womb from the moment of conception, because of technology. Is the zygote then considered a person because it can survive outside the mother's womb? if we have an artificial womb I have no real moral issues with wanting to cut an embryo (you can't cut a zygote out) of a mother and letting it develop in an artificial womb. I suspect in some ways this is preferable for non abortions as it spares the mother of having to actually birth the child. --- https://puu.sh/tcLsT/24f4611235.png <cite>ChromaticAngel posted [p:886820246] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Vindris_SNH posted...</cite> <quote>What happens when we have working artificial wombs? Then the baby is viable outside of the mother's womb from the moment of conception, because of technology. Is the zygote then considered a person because it can survive outside the mother's womb?</quote> if we have an artificial womb I have no real moral issues with wanting to cut an embryo (you can't cut a zygote out) of a mother and letting it develop in an artificial womb. I suspect in some ways this is preferable for non abortions as it spares the mother of having to actually birth the child.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
mortimerjames 09/18/17 10:57:59 AM #220:	What if the mother says she doesn't want any surgery? --- Tell me the story about how people used to believe in the Bible - Future kid to their grandparents <cite>mortimerjames posted [p:886820321] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote>What if the mother says she doesn't want any surgery?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChromaticAngel 09/18/17 11:00:28 AM #221:	mortimerjames posted... What if the mother says she doesn't want any surgery? it would be elective. not mandatory. I am not in favor of legally mandatory surgery for any reason unless a person is in a coma or unconscious and someone with POA makes a decision for them. --- https://puu.sh/tcLsT/24f4611235.png <cite>ChromaticAngel posted [p:886820445] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>mortimerjames posted...</cite> <quote>What if the mother says she doesn't want any surgery?</quote> it would be elective. not mandatory. I am not in favor of legally mandatory surgery for any reason unless a person is in a coma or unconscious and someone with POA makes a decision for them.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zodd3224 09/18/17 11:03:17 AM #222:	Abortion is wrong IMO. Im not religious. It equates to murder to me. --- "Must of dabed in the wrong neighborhood." - Mr. Dab <cite>Zodd3224 posted [p:886820569] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote>Abortion is wrong IMO. Im not religious. It equates to murder to me.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
mortimerjames 09/18/17 11:29:54 AM #223:	All in all, the real debate is can/should we force people to have medical procedures and direct their lifestyle. What's to stop a woman from smoking and drinking while pregnant to ruin the baby? --- Tell me the story about how people used to believe in the Bible - Future kid to their grandparents <cite>mortimerjames posted [p:886821821] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote>All in all, the real debate is can/should we force people to have medical procedures and direct their lifestyle. What's to stop a woman from smoking and drinking while pregnant to ruin the baby?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChromaticAngel 09/18/17 11:37:32 AM #224:	Zodd3224 posted... Abortion is wrong IMO. Im not religious. It equates to murder to me. If you are not religious, then your definition of murder is the unlawful killing of a human. Since abortion is not unlawful, then it is not murder and can never be murder in a state where abortion is not unlawful. Try again. Once more with feeling. --- https://puu.sh/tcLsT/24f4611235.png <cite>ChromaticAngel posted [p:886822196] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>Abortion is wrong IMO. Im not religious. It equates to murder to me.</quote> If you are not religious, then your definition of murder is the unlawful killing of a human. Since abortion is not unlawful, then it is not murder and can never be murder in a state where abortion is not unlawful. Try again. Once more with feeling.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Vindris_SNH 09/18/17 11:44:57 AM #225:	ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... Abortion is wrong IMO. Im not religious. It equates to murder to me. If you are not religious, then your definition of murder is the unlawful killing of a human. Since abortion is not unlawful, then it is not murder and can never be murder in a state where abortion is not unlawful. Try again. Once more with feeling. I think what he's saying is that he feels it should be considered murder. --- glitteringfairy: Just build the damn wall ThyCorndog: and how exactly will that stop the mexican space program from orbital dropping illegal immigrants? <cite>Vindris_SNH posted [p:886822587] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>Abortion is wrong IMO. Im not religious. It equates to murder to me.</quote> If you are not religious, then your definition of murder is the unlawful killing of a human. Since abortion is not unlawful, then it is not murder and can never be murder in a state where abortion is not unlawful. Try again. Once more with feeling.</quote> I think what he's saying is that he feels it should be considered murder.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
hockeybub89 09/18/17 11:45:36 AM #226:	Vindris_SNH posted... What happens when we have working artificial wombs? Then the baby is viable outside of the mother's womb from the moment of conception, because of technology. Is the zygote then considered a person because it can survive outside the mother's womb? It would still need a womb, so it can still be terminated. Artificial wombs would be a great thing, but we shouldn't use them to birth every unwanted baby on the planet. They'd be there for mothers who cannot have children normally. Plus, you still couldn't force a woman to opt in to this procedure. That doesn't even get into the fact that abortion still just makes sense from a utilitarian point of view. We have enough pain and suffering among our fully formed population. Artificial wombs might get rid of unwilling parents, but that doesn't mean we'd find willing ones. We don't need a few million more orphans just because we're hellbent on every potential life being sacred or whatever. --- http://card.psnprofiles.com/1/NIR_Hockey.png http://www.last.fm/user/hockeybub89/ <cite>hockeybub89 posted [p:886822618] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Vindris_SNH posted...</cite> <quote>What happens when we have working artificial wombs? Then the baby is viable outside of the mother's womb from the moment of conception, because of technology. Is the zygote then considered a person because it can survive outside the mother's womb?</quote> It would still need a womb, so it can still be terminated. Artificial wombs would be a great thing, but we shouldn't use them to birth every unwanted baby on the planet. They'd be there for mothers who cannot have children normally. Plus, you still couldn't force a woman to opt in to this procedure. That doesn't even get into the fact that abortion still just makes sense from a utilitarian point of view. We have enough pain and suffering among our fully formed population. Artificial wombs might get rid of unwilling parents, but that doesn't mean we'd find willing ones. We don't need a few million more orphans just because we're hellbent on every potential life being sacred or whatever.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zodd3224 09/18/17 11:47:05 AM #227:	ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... Abortion is wrong IMO. Im not religious. It equates to murder to me. If you are not religious, then your definition of murder is the unlawful killing of a human. Since abortion is not unlawful, then it is not murder and can never be murder in a state where abortion is not unlawful. Try again. Once more with feeling. With feeling? You want me to put some stank on it? I am not referring to the law. I am referring to my own personal beliefs. I think sucking out a growing human being from a stomach and chopping it up is killing. I dont care if it isnt "legally" a human being yet. Not sure I would want it outlawed though. I dont think that would prevent abortions, they would just go underground. I dont like how socially acceptable they have become tho. --- "Must of dabed in the wrong neighborhood." - Mr. Dab <cite>Zodd3224 posted [p:886822694] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>Abortion is wrong IMO. Im not religious. It equates to murder to me.</quote> If you are not religious, then your definition of murder is the unlawful killing of a human. Since abortion is not unlawful, then it is not murder and can never be murder in a state where abortion is not unlawful. Try again. Once more with feeling.</quote> With feeling? You want me to put some stank on it? I am not referring to the law. I am referring to my own personal beliefs. I think sucking out a growing human being from a stomach and chopping it up is killing. I dont care if it isnt "legally" a human being yet. Not sure I would want it outlawed though. I dont think that would prevent abortions, they would just go underground. I dont like how socially acceptable they have become tho.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
hockeybub89 09/18/17 11:50:22 AM #228:	Zodd3224 posted... ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... Abortion is wrong IMO. Im not religious. It equates to murder to me. If you are not religious, then your definition of murder is the unlawful killing of a human. Since abortion is not unlawful, then it is not murder and can never be murder in a state where abortion is not unlawful. Try again. Once more with feeling. With feeling? You want me to put some stank on it? I am not referring to the law. I am referring to my own personal beliefs. I think sucking out a growing human being from a stomach and chopping it up is killing. I dont care if it isnt "legally" a human being yet. Not sure I would want it outlawed though. I dont think that would prevent abortions, they would just go underground. I dont like how socially acceptable they have become tho. So you don't think abortion is murder since you don't want it outlawed. You think it is killing. Everyone agrees that something is being killed. --- http://card.psnprofiles.com/1/NIR_Hockey.png http://www.last.fm/user/hockeybub89/ <cite>hockeybub89 posted [p:886822849] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>Abortion is wrong IMO. Im not religious. It equates to murder to me.</quote> If you are not religious, then your definition of murder is the unlawful killing of a human. Since abortion is not unlawful, then it is not murder and can never be murder in a state where abortion is not unlawful. Try again. Once more with feeling.</quote> With feeling? You want me to put some stank on it? I am not referring to the law. I am referring to my own personal beliefs. I think sucking out a growing human being from a stomach and chopping it up is killing. I dont care if it isnt "legally" a human being yet. Not sure I would want it outlawed though. I dont think that would prevent abortions, they would just go underground. I dont like how socially acceptable they have become tho.</quote> So you don't think abortion is murder since you don't want it outlawed. You think it is killing. Everyone agrees that something is being killed.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChromaticAngel 09/18/17 12:09:54 PM #229:	Zodd3224 posted... With feeling? You want me to put some stank on it? I am not referring to the law. I am referring to my own personal beliefs. I think sucking out a growing human being from a stomach and chopping it up is killing. I dont care if it isnt "legally" a human being yet. Not sure I would want it outlawed though. I dont think that would prevent abortions, they would just go underground. I dont like how socially acceptable they have become tho. If you're going to stand there and claim that you are not religious, you don't get to redefine words with legal meanings. You don't get to say "I don't believe it's lawful" because it factually is. You can kill a 25 year old man and if you do it in self defense, you've killed someone, but still haven't committed murder. That doesn't change just because the ages change. If you kill a 3-month developing embryo in a lawful way, it's not murder and never will be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_(fallacy)?g=s If you're going to claim that you're not religious, but can't tell the difference between killing and murder, then you shouldn't use those words in a debate. If you are going to take a religious position, then murder has meaning that is whatever your god(s) dictated it is, and it may and often does contradict with legal definitions. That's why the debate about abortion always drags religion into it. --- https://puu.sh/tcLsT/24f4611235.png <cite>ChromaticAngel posted [p:886823925] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote> With feeling? You want me to put some stank on it? I am not referring to the law. I am referring to my own personal beliefs. I think sucking out a growing human being from a stomach and chopping it up is killing. I dont care if it isnt "legally" a human being yet. Not sure I would want it outlawed though. I dont think that would prevent abortions, they would just go underground. I dont like how socially acceptable they have become tho.</quote> If you're going to stand there and claim that you are not religious, you don't get to redefine words with legal meanings. You don't get to say "I don't believe it's lawful" because it factually is. You can kill a 25 year old man and if you do it in self defense, you've killed someone, but still haven't committed murder. That doesn't change just because the ages change. If you kill a 3-month developing embryo in a lawful way, it's not murder and never will be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_(fallacy)?g=s If you're going to claim that you're not religious, but can't tell the difference between killing and murder, then you shouldn't use those words in a debate. If you are going to take a religious position, then murder has meaning that is whatever your god(s) dictated it is, and it may and often does contradict with legal definitions. That's why the debate about abortion always drags religion into it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zodd3224 09/18/17 12:29:13 PM #230:	ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... With feeling? You want me to put some stank on it? I am not referring to the law. I am referring to my own personal beliefs. I think sucking out a growing human being from a stomach and chopping it up is killing. I dont care if it isnt "legally" a human being yet. Not sure I would want it outlawed though. I dont think that would prevent abortions, they would just go underground. I dont like how socially acceptable they have become tho. If you're going to stand there and claim that you are not religious, you don't get to redefine words with legal meanings. You don't get to say "I don't believe it's lawful" because it factually is. You can kill a 25 year old man and if you do it in self defense, you've killed someone, but still haven't committed murder. That doesn't change just because the ages change. If you kill a 3-month developing embryo in a lawful way, it's not murder and never will be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_(fallacy)?g=s If you're going to claim that you're not religious, but can't tell the difference between killing and murder, then you shouldn't use those words in a debate. If you are going to take a religious position, then murder has meaning that is whatever your god(s) dictated it is, and it may and often does contradict with legal definitions. That's why the debate about abortion always drags religion into it. If you happened to read my 2nd post, I said killing instead of murder. Sorry if my use of the word murder instead of killing triggered you into a pompous frenzy. I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong. Is that better? --- "Must of dabed in the wrong neighborhood." - Mr. Dab <cite>Zodd3224 posted [p:886825009] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote> With feeling? You want me to put some stank on it? I am not referring to the law. I am referring to my own personal beliefs. I think sucking out a growing human being from a stomach and chopping it up is killing. I dont care if it isnt "legally" a human being yet. Not sure I would want it outlawed though. I dont think that would prevent abortions, they would just go underground. I dont like how socially acceptable they have become tho.</quote> If you're going to stand there and claim that you are not religious, you don't get to redefine words with legal meanings. You don't get to say "I don't believe it's lawful" because it factually is. You can kill a 25 year old man and if you do it in self defense, you've killed someone, but still haven't committed murder. That doesn't change just because the ages change. If you kill a 3-month developing embryo in a lawful way, it's not murder and never will be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_(fallacy)?g=s If you're going to claim that you're not religious, but can't tell the difference between killing and murder, then you shouldn't use those words in a debate. If you are going to take a religious position, then murder has meaning that is whatever your god(s) dictated it is, and it may and often does contradict with legal definitions. That's why the debate about abortion always drags religion into it.</quote> If you happened to read my 2nd post, I said killing instead of murder. Sorry if my use of the word murder instead of killing triggered you into a pompous frenzy. I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong. Is that better?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChromaticAngel 09/18/17 12:30:18 PM #231:	Zodd3224 posted... I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong. Why? --- https://puu.sh/tcLsT/24f4611235.png <cite>ChromaticAngel posted [p:886825062] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong.</quote> Why?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zodd3224 09/18/17 12:34:29 PM #232:	ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong. Why? http://www.webmd.com/baby/1to3-months Vacuuming that out and ending its developing life is wrong. Im curious why you dont find that morally wrong? --- "Must of dabed in the wrong neighborhood." - Mr. Dab <cite>Zodd3224 posted [p:886825275] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong.</quote> Why?</quote> http://www.webmd.com/baby/1to3-months Vacuuming that out and ending its developing life is wrong. Im curious why you dont find that morally wrong?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
hockeybub89 09/18/17 12:43:17 PM #233:	Zodd3224 posted... ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong. Why? http://www.webmd.com/baby/1to3-months Vacuuming that out and ending its developing life is wrong. Im curious why you dont find that morally wrong? You didn't answer his question. Posting a link of early fetal development isn't going to shake people to their core. I know I don't find it wrong because it still isn't a person and the mother doesn't want it. --- http://card.psnprofiles.com/1/NIR_Hockey.png http://www.last.fm/user/hockeybub89/ <cite>hockeybub89 posted [p:886825696] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong.</quote> Why?</quote> http://www.webmd.com/baby/1to3-months Vacuuming that out and ending its developing life is wrong. Im curious why you dont find that morally wrong?</quote> You didn't answer his question. Posting a link of early fetal development isn't going to shake people to their core. I know I don't find it wrong because it still isn't a person and the mother doesn't want it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zodd3224 09/18/17 12:54:18 PM #234:	hockeybub89 posted... Zodd3224 posted... ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong. Why? http://www.webmd.com/baby/1to3-months Vacuuming that out and ending its developing life is wrong. Im curious why you dont find that morally wrong? You didn't answer his question. Posting a link of early fetal development isn't going to shake people to their core. I know I don't find it wrong because it still isn't a person and the mother doesn't want it. Im not interested in shaking people to their core and Im not trying to change anyone's opinion. I'm simply stating mine. When I read that, that is human to me. Without you actively intervening it will be a human being. So its a few months away from "technically" being labeled human, big deal... I understand the unwanted child issue. But while the odds may not be in their favor for an enjoyable life, it isnt a guarantee their situation couldnt change from birth or early in their life. That isnt justification to kill them. "There is a higher chance than others that your life may not be ideal, lets kill you instead of letting you live." That isnt acceptable IMO. --- "Must of dabed in the wrong neighborhood." - Mr. Dab <cite>Zodd3224 posted [p:886826291] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong.</quote> Why?</quote> http://www.webmd.com/baby/1to3-months Vacuuming that out and ending its developing life is wrong. Im curious why you dont find that morally wrong?</quote> You didn't answer his question. Posting a link of early fetal development isn't going to shake people to their core. I know I don't find it wrong because it still isn't a person and the mother doesn't want it.</quote> Im not interested in shaking people to their core and Im not trying to change anyone's opinion. I'm simply stating mine. When I read that, that is human to me. Without you actively intervening it will be a human being. So its a few months away from "technically" being labeled human, big deal... I understand the unwanted child issue. But while the odds may not be in their favor for an enjoyable life, it isnt a guarantee their situation couldnt change from birth or early in their life. That isnt justification to kill them. "There is a higher chance than others that your life may not be ideal, lets kill you instead of letting you live." That isnt acceptable IMO.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChromaticAngel 09/18/17 1:21:16 PM #235:	Zodd3224 posted... ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong. Why? http://www.webmd.com/baby/1to3-months Vacuuming that out and ending its developing life is wrong. Im curious why you dont find that morally wrong? 1. "Why not?" isn't an answer. 2. I know what an embryo / fetus is. 3. insert link about what mother goes through for 9 months of pregnancy + what happens to academic progress of teen mothers in high school, generous and assume adoption instead of then having financial burdern for 18 years Unlike you, instead of saying "Why do you think it's not immoral to force someone to go through that against their will." I will tell you why it's immoral. 1. Forcing pregnancy is discriminatory towards the poor. Rich women can fly to another country and get abortions. Additionally, giving birth is significantly more expensive than abortion which hurts people that lack health insurance. 2. Pregnancy in high school forces a drop out which irrevocably fucks up the rest of the mother's life for a decision made during a time when bad decision frequency is at its peak due to kids being stupid, horny, and stupid + horny at the same time. 3. Circumstances under which a child is conceived are not always constant. Parents who are well prepared to have a child may suddenly go home one day to find out that their house burned down because of a fridge fire and have to move into one of their parents' or some other issue that turns life upside down. 4. A mother may have a medical issue such as smoking or alcoholism that she's currently struggling with that would have a terrible impact on the baby. 5. Certain women, particularly teens, live in households were they might be subjected to abuse themselves if their parents discovered they were pregnant. They need to be able to terminate the pregnancy discreetly without causing alarm. Now, you're free to elaborate why cutting out a clump of cells is immoral, and you're going to have to do better than "it just is" --- https://puu.sh/tcLsT/24f4611235.png <cite>ChromaticAngel posted [p:886827790] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong.</quote> Why?</quote> http://www.webmd.com/baby/1to3-months Vacuuming that out and ending its developing life is wrong. Im curious why you dont find that morally wrong?</quote> 1. "Why not?" isn't an answer. 2. I know what an embryo / fetus is. 3. insert link about what mother goes through for 9 months of pregnancy + what happens to academic progress of teen mothers in high school, generous and assume adoption instead of then having financial burdern for 18 years Unlike you, instead of saying "Why do you think it's not immoral to force someone to go through that against their will." I will tell you why it's immoral. 1. Forcing pregnancy is discriminatory towards the poor. Rich women can fly to another country and get abortions. Additionally, giving birth is significantly more expensive than abortion which hurts people that lack health insurance. 2. Pregnancy in high school forces a drop out which irrevocably fucks up the rest of the mother's life for a decision made during a time when bad decision frequency is at its peak due to kids being stupid, horny, and stupid + horny at the same time. 3. Circumstances under which a child is conceived are not always constant. Parents who are well prepared to have a child may suddenly go home one day to find out that their house burned down because of a fridge fire and have to move into one of their parents' or some other issue that turns life upside down. 4. A mother may have a medical issue such as smoking or alcoholism that she's currently struggling with that would have a terrible impact on the baby. 5. Certain women, particularly teens, live in households were they might be subjected to abuse themselves if their parents discovered they were pregnant. They need to be able to terminate the pregnancy discreetly without causing alarm. Now, you're free to elaborate why cutting out a clump of cells is immoral, and you're going to have to do better than "it just is"</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#236	Post #236 was unavailable or deleted.
#237	Post #237 was unavailable or deleted.
#238	Post #238 was unavailable or deleted.
Zodd3224 09/18/17 1:38:39 PM #239:	ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong. Why? http://www.webmd.com/baby/1to3-months Vacuuming that out and ending its developing life is wrong. Im curious why you dont find that morally wrong? 1. "Why not?" isn't an answer. 2. I know what an embryo / fetus is. 3. insert link about what mother goes through for 9 months of pregnancy + what happens to academic progress of teen mothers in high school, generous and assume adoption instead of then having financial burdern for 18 years Unlike you, instead of saying "Why do you think it's not immoral to force someone to go through that against their will." I will tell you why it's immoral. 1. Forcing pregnancy is discriminatory towards the poor. Rich women can fly to another country and get abortions. Additionally, giving birth is significantly more expensive than abortion which hurts people that lack health insurance. 2. Pregnancy in high school forces a drop out which irrevocably fucks up the rest of the mother's life for a decision made during a time when bad decision frequency is at its peak due to kids being stupid, horny, and stupid + horny at the same time. 3. Circumstances under which a child is conceived are not always constant. Parents who are well prepared to have a child may suddenly go home one day to find out that their house burned down because of a fridge fire and have to move into one of their parents' or some other issue that turns life upside down. 4. A mother may have a medical issue such as smoking or alcoholism that she's currently struggling with that would have a terrible impact on the baby. 5. Certain women, particularly teens, live in households were they might be subjected to abuse themselves if their parents discovered they were pregnant. They need to be able to terminate the pregnancy discreetly without causing alarm. Now, you're free to elaborate why cutting out a clump of cells is immoral, and you're going to have to do better than "it just is" Its funny how sympathetic you are to the pregnant person and their myriad excuses for not being responsible for the life they are creating (this applies to the father too). But the one being aborted is just a clump of cells... arent we all just clumps of cells? If you can live with and justify killing the growing human you had a hand in creating, thats on you. Personally I couldnt live with myself saying yes to aborting a child that would have been mine, no matter the circumstances. --- "Must of dabed in the wrong neighborhood." - Mr. Dab <cite>Zodd3224 posted [p:886828770] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong.</quote> Why?</quote> http://www.webmd.com/baby/1to3-months Vacuuming that out and ending its developing life is wrong. Im curious why you dont find that morally wrong?</quote> 1. "Why not?" isn't an answer. 2. I know what an embryo / fetus is. 3. insert link about what mother goes through for 9 months of pregnancy + what happens to academic progress of teen mothers in high school, generous and assume adoption instead of then having financial burdern for 18 years Unlike you, instead of saying "Why do you think it's not immoral to force someone to go through that against their will." I will tell you why it's immoral. 1. Forcing pregnancy is discriminatory towards the poor. Rich women can fly to another country and get abortions. Additionally, giving birth is significantly more expensive than abortion which hurts people that lack health insurance. 2. Pregnancy in high school forces a drop out which irrevocably fucks up the rest of the mother's life for a decision made during a time when bad decision frequency is at its peak due to kids being stupid, horny, and stupid + horny at the same time. 3. Circumstances under which a child is conceived are not always constant. Parents who are well prepared to have a child may suddenly go home one day to find out that their house burned down because of a fridge fire and have to move into one of their parents' or some other issue that turns life upside down. 4. A mother may have a medical issue such as smoking or alcoholism that she's currently struggling with that would have a terrible impact on the baby. 5. Certain women, particularly teens, live in households were they might be subjected to abuse themselves if their parents discovered they were pregnant. They need to be able to terminate the pregnancy discreetly without causing alarm. Now, you're free to elaborate why cutting out a clump of cells is immoral, and you're going to have to do better than "it just is"</quote> Its funny how sympathetic you are to the pregnant person and their myriad excuses for not being responsible for the life they are creating (this applies to the father too). But the one being aborted is just a clump of cells... arent we all just clumps of cells? If you can live with and justify killing the growing human you had a hand in creating, thats on you. Personally I couldnt live with myself saying yes to aborting a child that would have been mine, no matter the circumstances.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Vindris_SNH 09/18/17 1:42:26 PM #240:	@Asherlee10 posted... That's the thing. You're defining life as you subjectively see it, as am I. The potential for life argument doesn't rest well with me, which is why viability is my marker of personhood. And I strictly speak about personhood in terms of the law and assigning rights. I'm not subjectively defining life. That is what you are doing. I'm trying to help you understand how, scientifically, human life begins at conception. You don't have to agree with that, but then you'd be wrong. A newly formed zygote, at the moment of conception, is an individual human being. Sex is determined at conception. He (or she) has unique human DNA. By scientific definition, the newly conceived human zygote is the beginning of a human life. Let me try and make this concept even more simple for you. When did your life, as a living being, begin? Were you not at one time a newly conceived zygote? At that point were you not genetically the same as you are now? Were you not, at that moment of conception, part of the human race? You see a human zygote isn't just a zygote. It is a human zygote. It is a human life. That is, by scientific definition. --- glitteringfairy: Just build the damn wall ThyCorndog: and how exactly will that stop the mexican space program from orbital dropping illegal immigrants? <cite>Vindris_SNH posted [p:886829008] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>@Asherlee10 posted...</cite> <quote>That's the thing. You're defining life as you subjectively see it, as am I. The potential for life argument doesn't rest well with me, which is why viability is my marker of personhood. And I strictly speak about personhood in terms of the law and assigning rights.</quote> I'm not subjectively defining life. That is what you are doing. I'm trying to help you understand how, scientifically, human life begins at conception. You don't have to agree with that, but then you'd be wrong. A newly formed zygote, at the moment of conception, is an individual human being. Sex is determined at conception. He (or she) has unique human DNA. By scientific definition, the newly conceived human zygote is the beginning of a human life. Let me try and make this concept even more simple for you. When did your life, as a living being, begin? Were you not at one time a newly conceived zygote? At that point were you not genetically the same as you are now? Were you not, at that moment of conception, part of the human race? You see a human zygote isn't just a zygote. It is a human zygote. It is a human life. That is, by scientific definition.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#241	Post #241 was unavailable or deleted.
Zodd3224 09/18/17 1:46:49 PM #242:	Vindris_SNH posted... @Asherlee10 posted... That's the thing. You're defining life as you subjectively see it, as am I. The potential for life argument doesn't rest well with me, which is why viability is my marker of personhood. And I strictly speak about personhood in terms of the law and assigning rights. I'm not subjectively defining life. That is what you are doing. I'm trying to help you understand how, scientifically, human life begins at conception. You don't have to agree with that, but then you'd be wrong. A newly formed zygote, at the moment of conception, is an individual human being. Sex is determined at conception. He (or she) has unique human DNA. By scientific definition, the newly conceived human zygote is the beginning of a human life. Let me try and make this concept even more simple for you. When did your life, as a living being, begin? Were you not at one time a newly conceived zygote? At that point were you not genetically the same as you are now? Were you not, at that moment of conception, part of the human race? You see a human zygote isn't just a zygote. It is a human zygote. It is a human life. That is, by scientific definition. I agree with this --- "Must of dabed in the wrong neighborhood." - Mr. Dab <cite>Zodd3224 posted [p:886829294] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Vindris_SNH posted...</cite> <quote><cite>@Asherlee10 posted...</cite> <quote>That's the thing. You're defining life as you subjectively see it, as am I. The potential for life argument doesn't rest well with me, which is why viability is my marker of personhood. And I strictly speak about personhood in terms of the law and assigning rights.</quote> I'm not subjectively defining life. That is what you are doing. I'm trying to help you understand how, scientifically, human life begins at conception. You don't have to agree with that, but then you'd be wrong. A newly formed zygote, at the moment of conception, is an individual human being. Sex is determined at conception. He (or she) has unique human DNA. By scientific definition, the newly conceived human zygote is the beginning of a human life. Let me try and make this concept even more simple for you. When did your life, as a living being, begin? Were you not at one time a newly conceived zygote? At that point were you not genetically the same as you are now? Were you not, at that moment of conception, part of the human race? You see a human zygote isn't just a zygote. It is a human zygote. It is a human life. That is, by scientific definition.</quote> I agree with this</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 09/18/17 1:51:29 PM #243:	Zodd3224 posted... ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong. Why? http://www.webmd.com/baby/1to3-months Vacuuming that out and ending its developing life is wrong. Im curious why you dont find that morally wrong? 1. "Why not?" isn't an answer. 2. I know what an embryo / fetus is. 3. insert link about what mother goes through for 9 months of pregnancy + what happens to academic progress of teen mothers in high school, generous and assume adoption instead of then having financial burdern for 18 years Unlike you, instead of saying "Why do you think it's not immoral to force someone to go through that against their will." I will tell you why it's immoral. 1. Forcing pregnancy is discriminatory towards the poor. Rich women can fly to another country and get abortions. Additionally, giving birth is significantly more expensive than abortion which hurts people that lack health insurance. 2. Pregnancy in high school forces a drop out which irrevocably fucks up the rest of the mother's life for a decision made during a time when bad decision frequency is at its peak due to kids being stupid, horny, and stupid + horny at the same time. 3. Circumstances under which a child is conceived are not always constant. Parents who are well prepared to have a child may suddenly go home one day to find out that their house burned down because of a fridge fire and have to move into one of their parents' or some other issue that turns life upside down. 4. A mother may have a medical issue such as smoking or alcoholism that she's currently struggling with that would have a terrible impact on the baby. 5. Certain women, particularly teens, live in households were they might be subjected to abuse themselves if their parents discovered they were pregnant. They need to be able to terminate the pregnancy discreetly without causing alarm. Now, you're free to elaborate why cutting out a clump of cells is immoral, and you're going to have to do better than "it just is" Its funny how sympathetic you are to the pregnant person and their myriad excuses for not being responsible for the life they are creating (this applies to the father too). But the one being aborted is just a clump of cells... arent we all just clumps of cells? If you can live with and justify killing the growing human you had a hand in creating, thats on you. Personally I couldnt live with myself saying yes to aborting a child that would have been mine, no matter the circumstances. What if it had holes in its brain and doctors had concluded all it would be able to do after birth would be experiencing extreme pain and literally constant seizures? No speech, no motor function, minimal sensory perception aside from the extreme pain. Literally 100% of its life would be beyond torture and it wouldn't last more than a few years. Condition is incurable and untreatable. Note this is a real case. The mother didn't find out about the condition until 8 months in and decided to end the fetus' misery, but had to fly a thousand miles to get to where it was legal. --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:886829549] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong.</quote> Why?</quote> http://www.webmd.com/baby/1to3-months Vacuuming that out and ending its developing life is wrong. Im curious why you dont find that morally wrong?</quote> 1. "Why not?" isn't an answer. 2. I know what an embryo / fetus is. 3. insert link about what mother goes through for 9 months of pregnancy + what happens to academic progress of teen mothers in high school, generous and assume adoption instead of then having financial burdern for 18 years Unlike you, instead of saying "Why do you think it's not immoral to force someone to go through that against their will." I will tell you why it's immoral. 1. Forcing pregnancy is discriminatory towards the poor. Rich women can fly to another country and get abortions. Additionally, giving birth is significantly more expensive than abortion which hurts people that lack health insurance. 2. Pregnancy in high school forces a drop out which irrevocably fucks up the rest of the mother's life for a decision made during a time when bad decision frequency is at its peak due to kids being stupid, horny, and stupid + horny at the same time. 3. Circumstances under which a child is conceived are not always constant. Parents who are well prepared to have a child may suddenly go home one day to find out that their house burned down because of a fridge fire and have to move into one of their parents' or some other issue that turns life upside down. 4. A mother may have a medical issue such as smoking or alcoholism that she's currently struggling with that would have a terrible impact on the baby. 5. Certain women, particularly teens, live in households were they might be subjected to abuse themselves if their parents discovered they were pregnant. They need to be able to terminate the pregnancy discreetly without causing alarm. Now, you're free to elaborate why cutting out a clump of cells is immoral, and you're going to have to do better than "it just is"</quote> Its funny how sympathetic you are to the pregnant person and their myriad excuses for not being responsible for the life they are creating (this applies to the father too). But the one being aborted is just a clump of cells... arent we all just clumps of cells? If you can live with and justify killing the growing human you had a hand in creating, thats on you. Personally I couldnt live with myself saying yes to aborting a child that would have been mine, no matter the circumstances.</quote> What if it had holes in its brain and doctors had concluded all it would be able to do after birth would be experiencing extreme pain and literally constant seizures? No speech, no motor function, minimal sensory perception aside from the extreme pain. Literally 100% of its life would be beyond torture and it wouldn't last more than a few years. Condition is incurable and untreatable. Note this is a real case. The mother didn't find out about the condition until 8 months in and decided to end the fetus' misery, but had to fly a thousand miles to get to where it was legal.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
That_Happened 09/18/17 1:53:16 PM #244:	Zodd3224 posted... Its funny how sympathetic you are to the pregnant person and their myriad excuses for not being responsible for the life they are creating (this applies to the father too). But the one being aborted is just a clump of cells... arent we all just clumps of cells? That's how I define my morality as well, and I don't think it's odd at all. I am sympathetic to the already-living individual. The one who is trying NOT to make the irresponsible decision to bring a life into the world that they are not prepared to raise or capable of raising. The counterpoint to this is usually "Well then they shouldn't have made the irresponsible decision to have sex" but a. that decision is not always irresponsible--a husband and wife accidentally conceiving while having a healthy normal sex life within their marriage is not "irresponsible", and b. even if it was someone being irresponsible, having the child would be yet another irresponsible decision. --- http://fusionanomaly.net/magnoliabutitdidhappen.jpg <cite>That_Happened posted [p:886829649] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>Its funny how sympathetic you are to the pregnant person and their myriad excuses for not being responsible for the life they are creating (this applies to the father too). But the one being aborted is just a clump of cells... arent we all just clumps of cells? </quote> That's how I define my morality as well, and I don't think it's odd at all. I am sympathetic to the already-living individual. The one who is trying NOT to make the irresponsible decision to bring a life into the world that they are not prepared to raise or capable of raising. The counterpoint to this is usually "Well then they shouldn't have made the irresponsible decision to have sex" but a. that decision is not always irresponsible--a husband and wife accidentally conceiving while having a healthy normal sex life within their marriage is not "irresponsible", and b. even if it was someone being irresponsible, having the child would be yet another irresponsible decision.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChromaticAngel 09/18/17 1:53:26 PM #245:	Zodd3224 posted... arent we all just clumps of cells? No I don't know how to answer that question with any more absolution. Zodd3224 posted... Its funny how sympathetic you are to the pregnant person and their myriad excuses for not being responsible for the life they are creating (this applies to the father too). But the one being aborted is just a clump of cells... arent we all just clumps of cells? If you can live with and justify killing the growing human you had a hand in creating, thats on you. Personally I couldnt live with myself saying yes to aborting a child that would have been mine, no matter the circumstances. To address the post in whole. Yes, my position on abortion stems from compassion for pregnant women willing to admit they made a mistake. Your position is one of "women (and men) need to take responsibility for being pregnant" and zero compassion towards the life that is created after it has been created. And compassion is always going to be considered more moral than "you made your bed now lie in it" People like you always talk big until they find themselves in a fucked position and want people to have compassion and understanding all of a sudden. http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/anti-tales.shtml (collection of anonymous stories about pro-life activists justifying their abortions, relayed by the surgeons that performed them) But if you find my compassion towards women immoral then that's your issue, not mine. You still haven't really listed any reasons why abortion is immoral, just "well I could never do it" --- https://puu.sh/tcLsT/24f4611235.png <cite>ChromaticAngel posted [p:886829660] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>arent we all just clumps of cells?</quote> No I don't know how to answer that question with any more absolution. <cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>Its funny how sympathetic you are to the pregnant person and their myriad excuses for not being responsible for the life they are creating (this applies to the father too). But the one being aborted is just a clump of cells... arent we all just clumps of cells? If you can live with and justify killing the growing human you had a hand in creating, thats on you. Personally I couldnt live with myself saying yes to aborting a child that would have been mine, no matter the circumstances.</quote> To address the post in whole. Yes, my position on abortion stems from compassion for pregnant women willing to admit they made a mistake. Your position is one of "women (and men) need to take responsibility for being pregnant" and zero compassion towards the life that is created after it has been created. And compassion is always going to be considered more moral than "you made your bed now lie in it" People like you always talk big until they find themselves in a fucked position and want people to have compassion and understanding all of a sudden. http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/anti-tales.shtml (collection of anonymous stories about pro-life activists justifying their abortions, relayed by the surgeons that performed them) But if you find my compassion towards women immoral then that's your issue, not mine. You still haven't really listed any reasons why abortion is immoral, just "well I could never do it"</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Vindris_SNH 09/18/17 1:55:52 PM #246:	@Asherlee10 posted... As we have already been over this, there is no concrete consensus in the scientific community about the moment human life sparks That has not been a discussion. It has been you denying proven scientific fact. "The life of a human being begins at conception" is a 100% scientifically accurate statement. Don't let yourself remain ignorant on this. I implore you to educate yourself. Personhood and viability are separate issues, but the beginning of human life is scientifically not up for debate. It begins at conception. @Asherlee10 posted... I understand that is when you think human life sparks. Again there is not a scientific consensus on this, I'm sorry to tell you that. Again, I'm sorry to tell you that you're misinformed. Educate yourself. I'll provide links below to help you out. http://www.justfactsdaily.com/the-science-of-abortion-when-does-life-begin/ https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/life-issues/when-human-life-begins https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html --- glitteringfairy: Just build the damn wall ThyCorndog: and how exactly will that stop the mexican space program from orbital dropping illegal immigrants? <cite>Vindris_SNH posted [p:886829801] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>@Asherlee10 posted...</cite> <quote>As we have already been over this, there is no concrete consensus in the scientific community about the moment human life sparks</quote> That has not been a discussion. It has been you denying proven scientific fact. "The life of a human being begins at conception" is a 100% scientifically accurate statement. Don't let yourself remain ignorant on this. I implore you to educate yourself. Personhood and viability are separate issues, but the beginning of human life is scientifically not up for debate. It begins at conception. <cite>@Asherlee10 posted...</cite> <quote>I understand that is when you think human life sparks. Again there is not a scientific consensus on this, I'm sorry to tell you that.</quote> Again, I'm sorry to tell you that you're misinformed. Educate yourself. I'll provide links below to help you out. http://www.justfactsdaily.com/the-science-of-abortion-when-does-life-begin/ https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/life-issues/when-human-life-begins https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 09/18/17 1:56:43 PM #247:	Zodd3224 posted... Vindris_SNH posted... @Asherlee10 posted... That's the thing. You're defining life as you subjectively see it, as am I. The potential for life argument doesn't rest well with me, which is why viability is my marker of personhood. And I strictly speak about personhood in terms of the law and assigning rights. I'm not subjectively defining life. That is what you are doing. I'm trying to help you understand how, scientifically, human life begins at conception. You don't have to agree with that, but then you'd be wrong. A newly formed zygote, at the moment of conception, is an individual human being. Sex is determined at conception. He (or she) has unique human DNA. By scientific definition, the newly conceived human zygote is the beginning of a human life. Let me try and make this concept even more simple for you. When did your life, as a living being, begin? Were you not at one time a newly conceived zygote? At that point were you not genetically the same as you are now? Were you not, at that moment of conception, part of the human race? You see a human zygote isn't just a zygote. It is a human zygote. It is a human life. That is, by scientific definition. I agree with this I don't. I had no self awareness as a zygote. I could have been aborted instead of being put up for adoption and that is fine by me. I consider it a coin flip. Had that been the case, I would have ceased to exist before i could know I existed. Doesn't bother me in the slightest. I still don't have any evidence to confirm whether or not I would have been better off that way. Another coin flip perhaps. --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:886829842] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Vindris_SNH posted...</cite> <quote><cite>@Asherlee10 posted...</cite> <quote>That's the thing. You're defining life as you subjectively see it, as am I. The potential for life argument doesn't rest well with me, which is why viability is my marker of personhood. And I strictly speak about personhood in terms of the law and assigning rights.</quote> I'm not subjectively defining life. That is what you are doing. I'm trying to help you understand how, scientifically, human life begins at conception. You don't have to agree with that, but then you'd be wrong. A newly formed zygote, at the moment of conception, is an individual human being. Sex is determined at conception. He (or she) has unique human DNA. By scientific definition, the newly conceived human zygote is the beginning of a human life. Let me try and make this concept even more simple for you. When did your life, as a living being, begin? Were you not at one time a newly conceived zygote? At that point were you not genetically the same as you are now? Were you not, at that moment of conception, part of the human race? You see a human zygote isn't just a zygote. It is a human zygote. It is a human life. That is, by scientific definition.</quote> I agree with this</quote> I don't. I had no self awareness as a zygote. I could have been aborted instead of being put up for adoption and that is fine by me. I consider it a coin flip. Had that been the case, I would have ceased to exist before i could know I existed. Doesn't bother me in the slightest. I still don't have any evidence to confirm whether or not I would have been better off that way. Another coin flip perhaps.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zodd3224 09/18/17 1:58:31 PM #248:	ImTheMacheteGuy posted... Zodd3224 posted... ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong. Why? http://www.webmd.com/baby/1to3-months Vacuuming that out and ending its developing life is wrong. Im curious why you dont find that morally wrong? 1. "Why not?" isn't an answer. 2. I know what an embryo / fetus is. 3. insert link about what mother goes through for 9 months of pregnancy + what happens to academic progress of teen mothers in high school, generous and assume adoption instead of then having financial burdern for 18 years Unlike you, instead of saying "Why do you think it's not immoral to force someone to go through that against their will." I will tell you why it's immoral. 1. Forcing pregnancy is discriminatory towards the poor. Rich women can fly to another country and get abortions. Additionally, giving birth is significantly more expensive than abortion which hurts people that lack health insurance. 2. Pregnancy in high school forces a drop out which irrevocably fucks up the rest of the mother's life for a decision made during a time when bad decision frequency is at its peak due to kids being stupid, horny, and stupid + horny at the same time. 3. Circumstances under which a child is conceived are not always constant. Parents who are well prepared to have a child may suddenly go home one day to find out that their house burned down because of a fridge fire and have to move into one of their parents' or some other issue that turns life upside down. 4. A mother may have a medical issue such as smoking or alcoholism that she's currently struggling with that would have a terrible impact on the baby. 5. Certain women, particularly teens, live in households were they might be subjected to abuse themselves if their parents discovered they were pregnant. They need to be able to terminate the pregnancy discreetly without causing alarm. Now, you're free to elaborate why cutting out a clump of cells is immoral, and you're going to have to do better than "it just is" Its funny how sympathetic you are to the pregnant person and their myriad excuses for not being responsible for the life they are creating (this applies to the father too). But the one being aborted is just a clump of cells... arent we all just clumps of cells? If you can live with and justify killing the growing human you had a hand in creating, thats on you. Personally I couldnt live with myself saying yes to aborting a child that would have been mine, no matter the circumstances. What if it had holes in its brain and doctors had concluded all it would be able to do after birth would be experiencing extreme pain and literally constant seizures? No speech, no motor function, minimal sensory perception aside from the extreme pain. Literally 100% of its life would be beyond torture and it wouldn't last more than a few years. Condition is incurable and untreatable. Note this is a real case. The mother didn't find out about the condition until 8 months in and decided to end the fetus' misery, but had to fly a thousand miles to get to where it was legal. That's a different story and understand that everything isnt always black and white. That's a far different case than someone too lazy/stupid to use birth control and using abortion as birth control. --- "Must of dabed in the wrong neighborhood." - Mr. Dab <cite>Zodd3224 posted [p:886829949] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong.</quote> Why?</quote> http://www.webmd.com/baby/1to3-months Vacuuming that out and ending its developing life is wrong. Im curious why you dont find that morally wrong?</quote> 1. "Why not?" isn't an answer. 2. I know what an embryo / fetus is. 3. insert link about what mother goes through for 9 months of pregnancy + what happens to academic progress of teen mothers in high school, generous and assume adoption instead of then having financial burdern for 18 years Unlike you, instead of saying "Why do you think it's not immoral to force someone to go through that against their will." I will tell you why it's immoral. 1. Forcing pregnancy is discriminatory towards the poor. Rich women can fly to another country and get abortions. Additionally, giving birth is significantly more expensive than abortion which hurts people that lack health insurance. 2. Pregnancy in high school forces a drop out which irrevocably fucks up the rest of the mother's life for a decision made during a time when bad decision frequency is at its peak due to kids being stupid, horny, and stupid + horny at the same time. 3. Circumstances under which a child is conceived are not always constant. Parents who are well prepared to have a child may suddenly go home one day to find out that their house burned down because of a fridge fire and have to move into one of their parents' or some other issue that turns life upside down. 4. A mother may have a medical issue such as smoking or alcoholism that she's currently struggling with that would have a terrible impact on the baby. 5. Certain women, particularly teens, live in households were they might be subjected to abuse themselves if their parents discovered they were pregnant. They need to be able to terminate the pregnancy discreetly without causing alarm. Now, you're free to elaborate why cutting out a clump of cells is immoral, and you're going to have to do better than "it just is"</quote> Its funny how sympathetic you are to the pregnant person and their myriad excuses for not being responsible for the life they are creating (this applies to the father too). But the one being aborted is just a clump of cells... arent we all just clumps of cells? If you can live with and justify killing the growing human you had a hand in creating, thats on you. Personally I couldnt live with myself saying yes to aborting a child that would have been mine, no matter the circumstances.</quote> What if it had holes in its brain and doctors had concluded all it would be able to do after birth would be experiencing extreme pain and literally constant seizures? No speech, no motor function, minimal sensory perception aside from the extreme pain. Literally 100% of its life would be beyond torture and it wouldn't last more than a few years. Condition is incurable and untreatable. Note this is a real case. The mother didn't find out about the condition until 8 months in and decided to end the fetus' misery, but had to fly a thousand miles to get to where it was legal.</quote> That's a different story and understand that everything isnt always black and white. That's a far different case than someone too lazy/stupid to use birth control and using abortion as birth control.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 09/18/17 1:59:10 PM #249:	Vindris_SNH posted... @Asherlee10 posted... As we have already been over this, there is no concrete consensus in the scientific community about the moment human life sparks That has not been a discussion. It has been you denying proven scientific fact. "The life of a human being begins at conception" is a 100% scientifically accurate statement. Don't let yourself remain ignorant on this. I implore you to educate yourself. Personhood and viability are separate issues, but the beginning of human life is scientifically not up for debate. It begins at conception. @Asherlee10 posted... I understand that is when you think human life sparks. Again there is not a scientific consensus on this, I'm sorry to tell you that. Again, I'm sorry to tell you that you're misinformed. Educate yourself. I'll provide links below to help you out. http://www.justfactsdaily.com/the-science-of-abortion-when-does-life-begin/ https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/life-issues/when-human-life-begins https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html "You don't believe me so therefore you aren't educated" Yeah, that's cute... --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:886829983] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Vindris_SNH posted...</cite> <quote><cite>@Asherlee10 posted...</cite> <quote>As we have already been over this, there is no concrete consensus in the scientific community about the moment human life sparks</quote> That has not been a discussion. It has been you denying proven scientific fact. "The life of a human being begins at conception" is a 100% scientifically accurate statement. Don't let yourself remain ignorant on this. I implore you to educate yourself. Personhood and viability are separate issues, but the beginning of human life is scientifically not up for debate. It begins at conception. <cite>@Asherlee10 posted...</cite> <quote>I understand that is when you think human life sparks. Again there is not a scientific consensus on this, I'm sorry to tell you that.</quote> Again, I'm sorry to tell you that you're misinformed. Educate yourself. I'll provide links below to help you out. http://www.justfactsdaily.com/the-science-of-abortion-when-does-life-begin/ https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/life-issues/when-human-life-begins https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html</quote> "You don't believe me so therefore you aren't educated" Yeah, that's cute...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#250	Post #250 was unavailable or deleted.
Zodd3224 09/18/17 2:02:02 PM #251:	ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... arent we all just clumps of cells? No I don't know how to answer that question with any more absolution. Zodd3224 posted... Its funny how sympathetic you are to the pregnant person and their myriad excuses for not being responsible for the life they are creating (this applies to the father too). But the one being aborted is just a clump of cells... arent we all just clumps of cells? If you can live with and justify killing the growing human you had a hand in creating, thats on you. Personally I couldnt live with myself saying yes to aborting a child that would have been mine, no matter the circumstances. To address the post in whole. Yes, my position on abortion stems from compassion for pregnant women willing to admit they made a mistake. Your position is one of "women (and men) need to take responsibility for being pregnant" and zero compassion towards the life that is created after it has been created. And compassion is always going to be considered more moral than "you made your bed now lie in it" People like you always talk big until they find themselves in a fucked position and want people to have compassion and understanding all of a sudden. http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/anti-tales.shtml (collection of anonymous stories about pro-life activists justifying their abortions, relayed by the surgeons that performed them) But if you find my compassion towards women immoral then that's your issue, not mine. You still haven't really listed any reasons why abortion is immoral, just "well I could never do it" Well, sorry if my compasion for the growing life is seen as not having compassion for women to you. --- "Must of dabed in the wrong neighborhood." - Mr. Dab <cite>Zodd3224 posted [p:886830152] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>arent we all just clumps of cells?</quote> No I don't know how to answer that question with any more absolution. <cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>Its funny how sympathetic you are to the pregnant person and their myriad excuses for not being responsible for the life they are creating (this applies to the father too). But the one being aborted is just a clump of cells... arent we all just clumps of cells? If you can live with and justify killing the growing human you had a hand in creating, thats on you. Personally I couldnt live with myself saying yes to aborting a child that would have been mine, no matter the circumstances.</quote> To address the post in whole. Yes, my position on abortion stems from compassion for pregnant women willing to admit they made a mistake. Your position is one of "women (and men) need to take responsibility for being pregnant" and zero compassion towards the life that is created after it has been created. And compassion is always going to be considered more moral than "you made your bed now lie in it" People like you always talk big until they find themselves in a fucked position and want people to have compassion and understanding all of a sudden. http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/anti-tales.shtml (collection of anonymous stories about pro-life activists justifying their abortions, relayed by the surgeons that performed them) But if you find my compassion towards women immoral then that's your issue, not mine. You still haven't really listed any reasons why abortion is immoral, just "well I could never do it"</quote> Well, sorry if my compasion for the growing life is seen as not having compassion for women to you.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChromaticAngel 09/18/17 2:02:08 PM #252:	Zodd3224 posted... That's a different story and understand that everything isnt always black and white. That's a far different case than someone too lazy/stupid to use birth control and using abortion as birth control. lets punish multiple families and the child because someone was stupid once so moral I am being overcome with morality --- https://puu.sh/tcLsT/24f4611235.png <cite>ChromaticAngel posted [p:886830160] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>That's a different story and understand that everything isnt always black and white. That's a far different case than someone too lazy/stupid to use birth control and using abortion as birth control.</quote> lets punish multiple families and the child because someone was stupid once so moral I am being overcome with morality</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 09/18/17 2:02:54 PM #253:	Zodd3224 posted... ImTheMacheteGuy posted... Zodd3224 posted... ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... ChromaticAngel posted... Zodd3224 posted... I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong. Why? http://www.webmd.com/baby/1to3-months Vacuuming that out and ending its developing life is wrong. Im curious why you dont find that morally wrong? 1. "Why not?" isn't an answer. 2. I know what an embryo / fetus is. 3. insert link about what mother goes through for 9 months of pregnancy + what happens to academic progress of teen mothers in high school, generous and assume adoption instead of then having financial burdern for 18 years Unlike you, instead of saying "Why do you think it's not immoral to force someone to go through that against their will." I will tell you why it's immoral. 1. Forcing pregnancy is discriminatory towards the poor. Rich women can fly to another country and get abortions. Additionally, giving birth is significantly more expensive than abortion which hurts people that lack health insurance. 2. Pregnancy in high school forces a drop out which irrevocably fucks up the rest of the mother's life for a decision made during a time when bad decision frequency is at its peak due to kids being stupid, horny, and stupid + horny at the same time. 3. Circumstances under which a child is conceived are not always constant. Parents who are well prepared to have a child may suddenly go home one day to find out that their house burned down because of a fridge fire and have to move into one of their parents' or some other issue that turns life upside down. 4. A mother may have a medical issue such as smoking or alcoholism that she's currently struggling with that would have a terrible impact on the baby. 5. Certain women, particularly teens, live in households were they might be subjected to abuse themselves if their parents discovered they were pregnant. They need to be able to terminate the pregnancy discreetly without causing alarm. Now, you're free to elaborate why cutting out a clump of cells is immoral, and you're going to have to do better than "it just is" Its funny how sympathetic you are to the pregnant person and their myriad excuses for not being responsible for the life they are creating (this applies to the father too). But the one being aborted is just a clump of cells... arent we all just clumps of cells? If you can live with and justify killing the growing human you had a hand in creating, thats on you. Personally I couldnt live with myself saying yes to aborting a child that would have been mine, no matter the circumstances. What if it had holes in its brain and doctors had concluded all it would be able to do after birth would be experiencing extreme pain and literally constant seizures? No speech, no motor function, minimal sensory perception aside from the extreme pain. Literally 100% of its life would be beyond torture and it wouldn't last more than a few years. Condition is incurable and untreatable. Note this is a real case. The mother didn't find out about the condition until 8 months in and decided to end the fetus' misery, but had to fly a thousand miles to get to where it was legal. That's a different story and understand that everything isnt always black and white. That's a far different case than someone too lazy/stupid to use birth control and using abortion as birth control. What I'm asking is what would you do in that scenario? You said you couldn't live with yourself. --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:886830193] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChromaticAngel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote>I morally think killing an embryo at any stage is wrong.</quote> Why?</quote> http://www.webmd.com/baby/1to3-months Vacuuming that out and ending its developing life is wrong. Im curious why you dont find that morally wrong?</quote> 1. "Why not?" isn't an answer. 2. I know what an embryo / fetus is. 3. insert link about what mother goes through for 9 months of pregnancy + what happens to academic progress of teen mothers in high school, generous and assume adoption instead of then having financial burdern for 18 years Unlike you, instead of saying "Why do you think it's not immoral to force someone to go through that against their will." I will tell you why it's immoral. 1. Forcing pregnancy is discriminatory towards the poor. Rich women can fly to another country and get abortions. Additionally, giving birth is significantly more expensive than abortion which hurts people that lack health insurance. 2. Pregnancy in high school forces a drop out which irrevocably fucks up the rest of the mother's life for a decision made during a time when bad decision frequency is at its peak due to kids being stupid, horny, and stupid + horny at the same time. 3. Circumstances under which a child is conceived are not always constant. Parents who are well prepared to have a child may suddenly go home one day to find out that their house burned down because of a fridge fire and have to move into one of their parents' or some other issue that turns life upside down. 4. A mother may have a medical issue such as smoking or alcoholism that she's currently struggling with that would have a terrible impact on the baby. 5. Certain women, particularly teens, live in households were they might be subjected to abuse themselves if their parents discovered they were pregnant. They need to be able to terminate the pregnancy discreetly without causing alarm. Now, you're free to elaborate why cutting out a clump of cells is immoral, and you're going to have to do better than "it just is"</quote> Its funny how sympathetic you are to the pregnant person and their myriad excuses for not being responsible for the life they are creating (this applies to the father too). But the one being aborted is just a clump of cells... arent we all just clumps of cells? If you can live with and justify killing the growing human you had a hand in creating, thats on you. Personally I couldnt live with myself saying yes to aborting a child that would have been mine, no matter the circumstances.</quote> What if it had holes in its brain and doctors had concluded all it would be able to do after birth would be experiencing extreme pain and literally constant seizures? No speech, no motor function, minimal sensory perception aside from the extreme pain. Literally 100% of its life would be beyond torture and it wouldn't last more than a few years. Condition is incurable and untreatable. Note this is a real case. The mother didn't find out about the condition until 8 months in and decided to end the fetus' misery, but had to fly a thousand miles to get to where it was legal.</quote> That's a different story and understand that everything isnt always black and white. That's a far different case than someone too lazy/stupid to use birth control and using abortion as birth control.</quote> What I'm asking is what would you do in that scenario? You said you couldn't live with yourself.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChromaticAngel 09/18/17 2:03:21 PM #254:	Zodd3224 posted... Well, sorry if my compasion for the growing life is seen as not having compassion for women to you. You don't have compassion for growing life. --- https://puu.sh/tcLsT/24f4611235.png <cite>ChromaticAngel posted [p:886830216] in Whether yo... [t:75774151]...</cite> <quote><cite>Zodd3224 posted...</cite> <quote> Well, sorry if my compasion for the growing life is seen as not having compassion for women to you.</quote> You don't have compassion for growing life.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3

Current Events > Whether you are for or against abortion (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > Whether you are for or against abortion