Abortion and Capital Punishment

[The Shadow Brotherhood]

Morale was invented by humans. You cannot say with accuracy that "abortion is wrong", and vice versa, without using morale.... morale can't be proven.

Nor can you say that stealing or murder is wrong, right?

Steal and kill everyone 2013!

Exactly. Morals are about as relative as gravity. Without them our society has no real core tenets, and will collapse into a humanitarian chaos.

[Mavorpen]

I have provided adequate sources, and unless you provide sources to the contrary, I will assume that the baby is conscious, to prevent from making a decision I will later regret.

Except, not a single one of your sources says they're conscious at 7-21 weeks.

[Ceannairceach]

No, you don't, if you think summary executions after a sham trial are a good idea.

I believe I've stated that I believe in giving defendants, human waste included, their fair opportunity to present their case, but I've certainly never mentioned anything about supporting sham trials. You can continue to say things that aren't true, or you can respond constructively to the discussion.

If you don't believe in the right to appeal, as you apparently don't based on your posts here, then you believe in sham trials and summary executions.

[Ceannairceach]

Yes, I do have a alternative where we can offload "human waste"; prison. There we can attempt rehabilitation. Which works in numerous cases.

Be honest. You want to watch people be executed, and are masking it behind a facade of caring about society. Don't lie to us.

Sentencing someone to life i prison is the same as saying that they have no value to society, and never will have value to society. Any funds put towards attempting to rehabilitate such individuals is therefore wasted. Your alternative continues to drain funds that execution does not, and is therefore not a viable alternative. If you find some habitable land not used by society and not occupied by another society to dump them, then you would have a viable alternative.

See my previous post about saying things that are not true vs being constructive.

Perhaps you should do such, as we're done here based on your intellectual dishonesty.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

Source on fetuses having pain impulses during the time when abortion is legal, and being capable of teaching them games. And five months AFTER birth. Read your own damn source.

Abortion is the way women get to protect their bodies from intrusion and exercise their right to bodily autonomy. By saying they can't have an abortion, you are stripping them of their rights and enslaving women.
With the death penalty, you are again stripping people of their rights. Just because they committed a crime in the past does not mean you get to take away their right to life now.

1. So you would rather endanger society than give people what they deserve? The death penalty is necessary, although I personally think all long-term criminals should be worked in labor, or at least given the option. They will be healthier, happier, and a good source of labor. Anyway, that is indeed a different subject, and irrelevant to the subject of abortion.

What we need is a balanced solution. If we don't have abortion allowed, women will do it anyway, in the alleys. Also, women who had a forced birth or have their life at risk do not bear the responsibility of the decision, and thus have the right to abort the baby. 2. Ultrasounds shouldn't be required for females under 18, but mandatory for all over 18.

Abortion doctors don't see the difference. 3. They are caught committing atrocities on live, born babies all of the time. The brain stem forms starting at 7 weeks, 4. and a baby can sense pain and is a viable baby at 23. 5. A baby born at 25 weeks has survived just fine.

And the way I see it, it is innocent until proven guilty. 6. I have provided adequate sources, and unless you provide sources to the contrary, I will assume that the baby is conscious, to prevent from making a decision I will later regret.

1. They don't deserve death.
2. No.
3. Source.
4. Source.
5. Most of them have severe developmental delays, underdeveloped organs, etc. And abortion isn't legal at that point in time so your "point" is moot.
6. No you haven't. Your sources have been the exact opposite of adequate.

[Frisivisia]

Nor can you say that stealing or murder is wrong, right?

Steal and kill everyone 2013!

Exactly. Morals are about as relative as gravity. Without them our society has no real core tenets, and will collapse into a humanitarian chaos.

No, morals are relative, but they're for us to decide, not just not there.

[The Shadow Brotherhood]

I have provided adequate sources, and unless you provide sources to the contrary, I will assume that the baby is conscious, to prevent from making a decision I will later regret.

Except, not a single one of your sources says they're conscious at 7-21 weeks.

5. "Fetuses become conscious at 8 weeks."
False. Fetuses begin to develop a minimal brain stem at 7 weeks, but are not capable of consciousness until the third trimester and most likely remain unconscious until birth. As one brain scientist puts it: "the fetus and neonate appears incapable of ... experiencing or generating 'true' emotion or any semblance of higher order, forebrain mediated cognitive activity."

Source: http://civilliberty.about.com/od/aborti ... nmyths.htm

Audible crying has been reported by 23 weeks g.a. in cases of abortion, revealing that babies are experiencing very appropriate emotion by that time. Close to the time of birth, medical personnel have documented crying from within the womb, in association with obstetrical procedures which have allowed air to enter the space around the fetal larynx.

Source: http://www.eheart.com/cesarean/babies.html

Right...

[Mavorpen]

Except, not a single one of your sources says they're conscious at 7-21 weeks.

5. "Fetuses become conscious at 8 weeks."
False. Fetuses begin to develop a minimal brain stem at 7 weeks, but are not capable of consciousness until the third trimester and most likely remain unconscious until birth. As one brain scientist puts it: "the fetus and neonate appears incapable of ... experiencing or generating 'true' emotion or any semblance of higher order, forebrain mediated cognitive activity."

Source: http://civilliberty.about.com/od/aborti ... nmyths.htm

Audible crying has been reported by 23 weeks g.a. in cases of abortion, revealing that babies are experiencing very appropriate emotion by that time. Close to the time of birth, medical personnel have documented crying from within the womb, in association with obstetrical procedures which have allowed air to enter the space around the fetal larynx.

Source: http://www.eheart.com/cesarean/babies.html

Right...

Thanks for proving me right.

[Sociobiology]

Source on fetuses having pain impulses during the time when abortion is legal, and being capable of teaching them games. And five months AFTER birth. Read your own damn source.

Abortion is the way women get to protect their bodies from intrusion and exercise their right to bodily autonomy. By saying they can't have an abortion, you are stripping them of their rights and enslaving women.
With the death penalty, you are again stripping people of their rights. Just because they committed a crime in the past does not mean you get to take away their right to life now.

So you would rather endanger society than give people what they deserve? The death penalty is necessary, although I personally think all long-term criminals should be worked in labor, or at least given the option. They will be healthier, happier, and a good source of labor. Anyway, that is indeed a different subject, and irrelevant to the subject of abortion.

What we need is a balanced solution. If we don't have abortion allowed, women will do it anyway, in the alleys. Also, women who had a forced birth or have their life at risk do not bear the responsibility of the decision, and thus have the right to abort the baby. Ultrasounds shouldn't be required for females under 18, but mandatory for all over 18.

why?

Abortion doctors don't see the difference. They are caught committing atrocities on live, born babies all of the time.

source?

The brain stem forms starting at 7 weeks, and a baby can sense pain and is a viable baby at 23. A baby born at 25 weeks has survived just fine.

what does whether is survives have to do with if it is conscious?

And the way I see it, it is innocent until proven guilty.

which is not the same thing as conscious.

I have provided adequate sources,

no you have not provided any.

link =/= source

and unless you provide sources to the contrary,

burden of proof is on the person making the claim.

I will assume that the baby is conscious, to prevent from making a decision I will later regret.

better assume rocks and trees are conscious too, if that is your reasoning.

[Tlaceceyaya]

Except, not a single one of your sources says they're conscious at 7-21 weeks.

5. "Fetuses become conscious at 8 weeks."
False. Fetuses begin to develop a minimal brain stem at 7 weeks, but are not capable of consciousness until the third trimester and most likely remain unconscious until birth. As one brain scientist puts it: "the fetus and neonate appears incapable of ... experiencing or generating 'true' emotion or any semblance of higher order, forebrain mediated cognitive activity."

Source: http://civilliberty.about.com/od/aborti ... nmyths.htm

Audible crying has been reported by 23 weeks g.a. in cases of abortion, revealing that babies are experiencing very appropriate emotion by that time. Close to the time of birth, medical personnel have documented crying from within the womb, in association with obstetrical procedures which have allowed air to enter the space around the fetal larynx.

Source: http://www.eheart.com/cesarean/babies.html

Right...

Holy fucking shit. Read my fucking post or another post on the last page which address the arguments rather than cherry-picking the easiest fucking ones to respond to.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

Except, not a single one of your sources says they're conscious at 7-21 weeks.

5. "Fetuses become conscious at 8 weeks."
False. Fetuses begin to develop a minimal brain stem at 7 weeks, but are not capable of consciousness until the third trimester and most likely remain unconscious until birth. As one brain scientist puts it: "the fetus and neonate appears incapable of ... experiencing or generating 'true' emotion or any semblance of higher order, forebrain mediated cognitive activity."

Source: http://civilliberty.about.com/od/aborti ... nmyths.htm

Audible crying has been reported by 23 weeks g.a. in cases of abortion, revealing that babies are experiencing very appropriate emotion by that time. Close to the time of birth, medical personnel have documented crying from within the womb, in association with obstetrical procedures which have allowed air to enter the space around the fetal larynx.

Source: http://www.eheart.com/cesarean/babies.html

Right...

The first source is first of all not reliable, AND says the opposite of what you're saying.
The second is not reliable in any way.
Reliable source or bust.

[Mavorpen]

5. "Fetuses become conscious at 8 weeks."
False. Fetuses begin to develop a minimal brain stem at 7 weeks, but are not capable of consciousness until the third trimester and most likely remain unconscious until birth. As one brain scientist puts it: "the fetus and neonate appears incapable of ... experiencing or generating 'true' emotion or any semblance of higher order, forebrain mediated cognitive activity."

Source: http://civilliberty.about.com/od/aborti ... nmyths.htm

Audible crying has been reported by 23 weeks g.a. in cases of abortion, revealing that babies are experiencing very appropriate emotion by that time. Close to the time of birth, medical personnel have documented crying from within the womb, in association with obstetrical procedures which have allowed air to enter the space around the fetal larynx.

Source: http://www.eheart.com/cesarean/babies.html

Right...

Holy fucking shit. Read my fucking post or another post on the last page which address the arguments rather than cherry-picking the easiest fucking ones to respond to.

Dude, his post literally confirmed that the sources don't say what he's claiming. I'm fine with him ignoring other posts if he continues proving HIS OWN CLAIMS wrong.

[Union Of Canadorian Socialists Republic]

Explain to me how "murder is factualy evil". I hold in my opinion that murder is wrong, at it is also my opinion that abortion should be legal. My opinion, as yours, cannot be proven.

[Aethrys]

A sentence of life imprisonment says that the individual receiving it is too much of a risk to ever allow back into society. This means that they have a net negative value that can never be made positive through rehabilitation. Spending resources to support them are therefore wasted. The only sensible thing to do is to do what costs the minimal amount of resources to ensure society no longer has to support them. And that is of course execution, unless you have somewhere to offload human waste, aside from somewhere they'll likely starve to death slowly, as that would be an inhumane practice. The British had a good thing going with exiling criminals. Of course some people would still need to be executed if they'd just pose an external threat to society.

1. it costs more to execute a criminal
2. you lose the ability to analyse them to determine how their deviancy arises if you execute them, everyone has worth, even if only to teach us how not to let more people like them happen.
3.just because they cannot be rehabilitated now does not mean they can never be, hence parole hearings.
4. The US system at least invests so little towards rehabilitation it is pointless to speculate about whether someone can be rehabilitated.

1. Due to inefficiency present in the system which can be improved. The solution is to fix the process, not scrap it entirely.
2. Those interested in such things have case notes, court records, and witness testimonies and the like to review, and from the time a death sentence is issued to the time it is carried out to conduct interviews, which may be recorded and preserved for future use.
3. Parole hearings go against the spirit of the sentence of life imprisonment. If someone is determined to be rehabilitated and paroled after being sentenced to life, they shouldn't have gotten a life sentence in the first place.
4. I agree, more should be spent on rehabilitating those who can be rehabilitated. Those who have received sentences short of life, from a year to five or whatever. Money can be diverted from the amount saved by not supporting those impossible to rehabilitate to go towards helping those that can be helped.

[Genivaria]

Explain to me how "murder is factualy evil". I hold in my opinion that murder is wrong, at it is also my opinion that abortion should be legal. My opinion, as yours, cannot be proven.

Evil as defined as 'destructive or harmful behavior that harms society' then murder is definitely evil.

[Spoder]

No abortion means that stupid minors will be having babies all the time. (Unless contraceptives are made available to them.) No death penalty means that U.S. Citizens will be paying for murderers and rapists to be clothed, fed, and given a bed.

[Sociobiology]

Except, not a single one of your sources says they're conscious at 7-21 weeks.

5. "Fetuses become conscious at 8 weeks."
False. Fetuses begin to develop a minimal brain stem at 7 weeks, but are not capable of consciousness until the third trimester and most likely remain unconscious until birth. As one brain scientist puts it: "the fetus and neonate appears incapable of ... experiencing or generating 'true' emotion or any semblance of higher order, forebrain mediated cognitive activity."

Source: http://civilliberty.about.com/od/aborti ... nmyths.htm

Audible crying has been reported by 23 weeks g.a. in cases of abortion, revealing that babies are experiencing very appropriate emotion by that time. Close to the time of birth, medical personnel have documented crying from within the womb, in association with obstetrical procedures which have allowed air to enter the space around the fetal larynx.

Source: http://www.eheart.com/cesarean/babies.html

Right...

you don't know the first thing about anatomy do you. Because those prove your claims false.

what exactly do you think the brain stem is, and what do you think it does?

[Frisivisia]

Explain to me how "murder is factualy evil". I hold in my opinion that murder is wrong, at it is also my opinion that abortion should be legal. My opinion, as yours, cannot be proven.

Because we, as a society, deem it to be so. Morality is relative, but that doesn't mean we can't define it.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

No abortion means that stupid minors will be having babies all the time. (Unless contraceptives are made available to them.) No death penalty means that U.S. Citizens will be paying for murderers and rapists to be clothed, fed, and given a bed.

It costs more to kill them than to detain them for life.

[Mavorpen]

what exactly do you think the brain stem is, and what do you think it does?

It gives the fetus superpowers.

[Genivaria]

No abortion means that stupid minors will be having babies all the time. (Unless contraceptives are made available to them.) No death penalty means that U.S. Citizens will be paying for murderers and rapists to be clothed, fed, and given a bed.

And the 'pro-life' crowd seem to be against birth control, condoms, and sex education as well.
At this point I'm entirely convinced that these 'pro-lifers' are actually trying to create poor people.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

what exactly do you think the brain stem is, and what do you think it does?

It gives the fetus superpowers.

It's how god communicates to the fetus and implants it with the true knowledge of the lizard people.

[Blasveck]

No abortion means that stupid minors will be having babies all the time. (Unless contraceptives are made available to them.) No death penalty means that U.S. Citizens will be paying for murderers and rapists to be clothed, fed, and given a bed.

So slut shaming?

Wonderful.

[Ceannairceach]

No abortion means that stupid minors will be having babies all the time. (Unless contraceptives are made available to them.) No death penalty means that U.S. Citizens will be paying for murderers and rapists to be clothed, fed, and given a bed.

As apposed to paying for the execution and trials, which costs more than life in prison.

[The Shadow Brotherhood]

1. So you would rather endanger society than give people what they deserve? The death penalty is necessary, although I personally think all long-term criminals should be worked in labor, or at least given the option. They will be healthier, happier, and a good source of labor. Anyway, that is indeed a different subject, and irrelevant to the subject of abortion.

What we need is a balanced solution. If we don't have abortion allowed, women will do it anyway, in the alleys. Also, women who had a forced birth or have their life at risk do not bear the responsibility of the decision, and thus have the right to abort the baby. 2. Ultrasounds shouldn't be required for females under 18, but mandatory for all over 18.

Abortion doctors don't see the difference. 3. They are caught committing atrocities on live, born babies all of the time. The brain stem forms starting at 7 weeks, 4. and a baby can sense pain and is a viable baby at 23. 5. A baby born at 25 weeks has survived just fine.

And the way I see it, it is innocent until proven guilty. 6. I have provided adequate sources, and unless you provide sources to the contrary, I will assume that the baby is conscious, to prevent from making a decision I will later regret.

1. They don't deserve death.
2. No.
3. Source.
4. Source.
5. Most of them have severe developmental delays, underdeveloped organs, etc. And abortion isn't legal at that point in time so your "point" is moot.
6. No you haven't. Your sources have been the exact opposite of adequate.

"1. They don't deserve death."

Yes, they do. They have infringed on another human's right to life, and deserve due punishment.

"6. No you haven't. Your sources have been the exact opposite of adequate."

Aww, thats a sweet opinion. Now can someone provide a single source proving that a baby isn't conscious, or self aware, within the timeframe I stated?

"5. Most of them have severe developmental delays, underdeveloped organs, etc. And abortion isn't legal at that point in time so your "point" is moot."

My point is that babies a known to be conscious late in development, so unless it can be proven to the contrary, we must assume that they are conscious beginning at the formation of the brainstem, the closest we can get to a scientific hypothesis.

"2. No."

What do you have opposed to them seeing what they are doing? If it isn't wrong, what is the harm? It is her decision after all, and fully morally justified!