Abortion in Texas Fully Legal Again

[The Huskar Social Union]

Great news.

[Laurasia]

"Forcing someone to stay pregnant." "An unwanted child." "A embryo/fetus." "A foreign object." These, and more, are some of things that have been said by pro-abortion supporters here. The concern here seems to be all for the woman, not taking into account the fact that in many cases, the woman indulges herself and gets herself in trouble. The cases where the couple is fully aware of what they are doing. And so on. And also the fact that abortion techniques are themselves horrific. This, http://www.priestsforlife.org/images/ab ... ries.aspxm, shows pictures of aborted babies. Do you not see anything inhumane in that? The fact that this could have been your fate?

it doesn't matter. the embryo (most abortions happen at the embryonic stage) has no feelings. it isn't developed enough. its not a child.

and it doesn't matter WHY the woman doesn't want to continue making a baby. what is going on inside her body is none of your business.

I am appalled at the inhumanity being shown by the people on this forum. You are clinging to your views that the embryo (as you prefer to call it) is not a developing, living organism. You are clinging to your views that the woman can abort children by demand. In the view of all of you, a woman could go, get herself pregnant by any man in the world, and abort the child without any consequences whatsoever for herself. As if it is her choice. It is not her choice. Human life is valuable, all life is valuable. There is a difference between aborting an innocent child and putting to death someone who has killed others. Yet to you, the murderer might live, while the child must die.

[Ashmoria]

it doesn't matter. the embryo (most abortions happen at the embryonic stage) has no feelings. it isn't developed enough. its not a child.

and it doesn't matter WHY the woman doesn't want to continue making a baby. what is going on inside her body is none of your business.

I am appalled at the inhumanity being shown by the people on this forum. You are clinging to your views that the embryo (as you prefer to call it) is not a developing, living organism. You are clinging to your views that the woman can abort children by demand. In the view of all of you, a woman could go, get herself pregnant by any man in the world, and abort the child without any consequences whatsoever for herself. As if it is her choice. It is not her choice. Human life is valuable, all life is valuable. There is a difference between aborting an innocent child and putting to death someone who has killed others. Yet to you, the murderer might live, while the child must die.

exactly.

[Galloism]

it doesn't matter. the embryo (most abortions happen at the embryonic stage) has no feelings. it isn't developed enough. its not a child.

and it doesn't matter WHY the woman doesn't want to continue making a baby. what is going on inside her body is none of your business.

I am appalled at the inhumanity being shown by the people on this forum. You are clinging to your views that the embryo (as you prefer to call it) is not a developing, living organism. You are clinging to your views that the woman can abort children by demand. In the view of all of you, a woman could go, get herself pregnant by any man in the world, and abort the child without any consequences whatsoever for herself. As if it is her choice. It is not her choice. Human life is valuable, all life is valuable. There is a difference between aborting an innocent child and putting to death someone who has killed others. Yet to you, the murderer might live, while the child must die.

I ask this a lot, but I'm going to ask you because I don't think I have before.

I have total renal failure. I need a kidney or I'm going to die. You're a match, and matches are extremely rare for people like you and me. It's a fairly safe surgery, but the risk of death still exists for you, albeit a small one.

Can we strap you down to a table against your will and forcibly remove one of your kidneys to give it to me?

Why or why not?

[Pandeeria]

it doesn't matter. the embryo (most abortions happen at the embryonic stage) has no feelings. it isn't developed enough. its not a child.

and it doesn't matter WHY the woman doesn't want to continue making a baby. what is going on inside her body is none of your business.

I am appalled at the inhumanity being shown by the people on this forum. You are clinging to your views that the embryo (as you prefer to call it) is not a developing, living organism. You are clinging to your views that the woman can abort children by demand. In the view of all of you, a woman could go, get herself pregnant by any man in the world, and abort the child without any consequences whatsoever for herself. As if it is her choice. It is not her choice. Human life is valuable, all life is valuable. There is a difference between aborting an innocent child and putting to death someone who has killed others. Yet to you, the murderer might live, while the child must die.

A murder is another person with emotions, feelings, hopes, dreams, and ambitions.

A fetus has little to none of those things. It is a parasitic life form that is developing, that is all it is and will be until it is born.

Stop making poor appeals to emotion; the woman has the right to remove what she doesn't want from her body.

[Narintia]

About time.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

it doesn't matter. the embryo (most abortions happen at the embryonic stage) has no feelings. it isn't developed enough. its not a child.

and it doesn't matter WHY the woman doesn't want to continue making a baby. what is going on inside her body is none of your business.

I am appalled at the inhumanity being shown by the people on this forum. You are clinging to your views that the embryo (as you prefer to call it) is not a developing, living organism.

Let me stop you right here.

No one has ever said that they're NOT a developing, living organism. To say that is wrong.

What they're arguing is that this embryo isn't a person, and even if it was, by giving more priority to him than to the mother we're giving a person rights that no one else has.

[Laurasia]

I am appalled at the inhumanity being shown by the people on this forum. You are clinging to your views that the embryo (as you prefer to call it) is not a developing, living organism. You are clinging to your views that the woman can abort children by demand. In the view of all of you, a woman could go, get herself pregnant by any man in the world, and abort the child without any consequences whatsoever for herself. As if it is her choice. It is not her choice. Human life is valuable, all life is valuable. There is a difference between aborting an innocent child and putting to death someone who has killed others. Yet to you, the murderer might live, while the child must die.

A murder is another person with emotions, feelings, hopes, dreams, and ambitions.

A fetus has little to none of those things. It is a parasitic life form that is developing, that is all it is and will be until it is born.

Stop making poor appeals to emotion; the woman has the right to remove what she doesn't want from her body.

I am not making poor appeals to emotion. I would like to repeat this famous observation: All of those who support abortion have already been born. You are all living and breathing on this Earth. If you had been aborted, you would never have existed. You claim the right to life for yourself, but would freely and carefully deny it to others. It's as if saying that someone can decide to "dispose" of another person and everyone else will say "His mind, his choice." That would be unethical.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

A murder is another person with emotions, feelings, hopes, dreams, and ambitions.

A fetus has little to none of those things. It is a parasitic life form that is developing, that is all it is and will be until it is born.

Stop making poor appeals to emotion; the woman has the right to remove what she doesn't want from her body.

I am not making poor appeals to emotion. I would like to repeat this famous observation: All of those who support abortion have already been born. You are all living and breathing on this Earth. If you had been aborted, you would never have existed. You claim the right to life for yourself, but would freely and carefully deny it to others. It's as if saying that someone can decide to "dispose" of another person and everyone else will say "His mind, his choice." That would be unethical.

Um, no, it wouldn't be.

You clearly don't understand the concept of "self-interests".

[Pandeeria]

A murder is another person with emotions, feelings, hopes, dreams, and ambitions.

A fetus has little to none of those things. It is a parasitic life form that is developing, that is all it is and will be until it is born.

Stop making poor appeals to emotion; the woman has the right to remove what she doesn't want from her body.

I am not making poor appeals to emotion. I would like to repeat this famous observation: All of those who support abortion have already been born. You are all living and breathing on this Earth. If you had been aborted, you would never have existed. You claim the right to life for yourself, but would freely and carefully deny it to others. It's as if saying that someone can decide to "dispose" of another person and everyone else will say "His mind, his choice." That would be unethical.

Fetuses don't have rights though. They're intruding on the mother's right to her own body. So try again.

[Laurasia]

I am not making poor appeals to emotion. I would like to repeat this famous observation: All of those who support abortion have already been born. You are all living and breathing on this Earth. If you had been aborted, you would never have existed. You claim the right to life for yourself, but would freely and carefully deny it to others. It's as if saying that someone can decide to "dispose" of another person and everyone else will say "His mind, his choice." That would be unethical.

Um, no, it wouldn't be.

You clearly don't understand the concept of "self-interests".

Now that it is established that you all support abortion, what will be next? Demanding the ability to abort a baby already born until it becomes self-sufficient? Abortion on demand would be established to the extent that all one would have to do is show up at a abortion clinic and have their operation performed, no questions asked. No time for thought. Or for an altered decision. More than fifty-six million babies have been aborted over the past forty-three years in the United States. That is a huge toll.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Um, no, it wouldn't be.

You clearly don't understand the concept of "self-interests".

Now that it is established that you all support abortion, what will be next?

1. Demanding the ability to abort a baby already born until it becomes self-sufficient?

2. Abortion on demand would be established to the extent that all one would have to do is show up at a abortion clinic and have their operation performed, no questions asked. No time for thought. Or for an altered decision.

3. More than fifty-six million babies have been aborted over the past forty-three years in the United States. That is a huge toll.

1. That would be infanticide. Noone is condoning infanticide. You might want to review what an "abortion" means.

2. In what world do you live in? Even in places where there are abortions on demand, they give some time for the woman to think about things and educate them on their decision.

3. And?

[Galloism]

1. That would be infanticide. Noone is condoning infanticide. You might want to review what an "abortion" means.

I suppose self-defense as a concept.

Clearly that means "what's next" is The Purge.

[Laurasia]

Now that it is established that you all support abortion, what will be next?

1. Demanding the ability to abort a baby already born until it becomes self-sufficient?

2. Abortion on demand would be established to the extent that all one would have to do is show up at a abortion clinic and have their operation performed, no questions asked. No time for thought. Or for an altered decision.

3. More than fifty-six million babies have been aborted over the past forty-three years in the United States. That is a huge toll.

1. That would be infanticide. Noone is condoning infanticide. You might want to review what an "abortion" means.

2. In what world do you live in? Even in places where there are abortions on demand, they give some time for the woman to think about things and educate them on their decision.

3. And?

But what you are advocating is complete abortion on demand. You would have it that a woman goes in, pays the fee, sits on the table, and has her abortion. No questions are asked at all, nothing is done to persuade the mother otherwise. Whenever she gets herself pregnant, she can decide, without informing the rightful father, to just go down and terminate the pregnancy. And she can do it, over and over again. That is wrong. The child in question is denied the chance at a productive, fulfilling life. Who knows what you and other pro-abortionists have done? You might have killed the person to cure cancer, or the next leader in our society.

And what about those with disabilities? Those living with them are recognized for their courage and their endurance in the face of adversity. Many of them have made productive, fulfilling lives for themselves. And have astounded all with their abilities and their will to survive. You would have it that all deformed or otherwise physically or mentally handicapped babies would be aborted. You would create a perfect, utopian society, where all are without blemish, all have relations with each other freely, all can abort without consequence, all can indulge in their lusts and their fantasies without consequence. Moral decay would set in, and human civilization would be destroyed in the course of time. That cannot be allowed to happen.

[Neutraligon]

Incorrect, what we have advocated is that a woman has the right to control when a foreign object remains or enters her body.

A "foreign object". What is a foreign object? The baby? You were once a foreign object in your own mother's body. How could you be so cruel and thoughtless?

Indeed I was once a foreign object. Easy, I wold not wish my mother to have been forced to bear me against her will. I as I am now would have no issue if my mother had aborted me (which was actually a possibility since her pregnancy made her very very sick.

[Pandeeria]

Um, no, it wouldn't be.

You clearly don't understand the concept of "self-interests".

Now that it is established that you all support abortion, what will be next? Demanding the ability to abort a baby already born until it becomes self-sufficient? Abortion on demand would be established to the extent that all one would have to do is show up at a abortion clinic and have their operation performed, no questions asked. No time for thought. Or for an altered decision. More than fifty-six million babies have been aborted over the past forty-three years in the United States. That is a huge toll.

"I can't come up with a proper argument, nor are my appeals to emotion working anymore so I'll just jump to stupid and crazy hypotheticals."

[Laurasia]

Now that it is established that you all support abortion, what will be next? Demanding the ability to abort a baby already born until it becomes self-sufficient? Abortion on demand would be established to the extent that all one would have to do is show up at a abortion clinic and have their operation performed, no questions asked. No time for thought. Or for an altered decision. More than fifty-six million babies have been aborted over the past forty-three years in the United States. That is a huge toll.

"I can't come up with a proper argument, nor are my appeals to emotion working anymore so I'll just jump to stupid and crazy hypotheticals."

That is not the truth at all. That is merely the definition of what is being demanded here. I could post tons of links to articles with intellectual arguments against abortion, but you would dismiss all of my sources as "biased" and "riddled with errors".

[Galloism]

"I can't come up with a proper argument, nor are my appeals to emotion working anymore so I'll just jump to stupid and crazy hypotheticals."

That is not the truth at all. That is merely the definition of what is being demanded here. I could post tons of links to articles with intellectual arguments against abortion, but you would dismiss all of my sources as "biased" and "riddled with errors".

I am appalled at the inhumanity being shown by the people on this forum. You are clinging to your views that the embryo (as you prefer to call it) is not a developing, living organism. You are clinging to your views that the woman can abort children by demand. In the view of all of you, a woman could go, get herself pregnant by any man in the world, and abort the child without any consequences whatsoever for herself. As if it is her choice. It is not her choice. Human life is valuable, all life is valuable. There is a difference between aborting an innocent child and putting to death someone who has killed others. Yet to you, the murderer might live, while the child must die.

I ask this a lot, but I'm going to ask you because I don't think I have before.

I have total renal failure. I need a kidney or I'm going to die. You're a match, and matches are extremely rare for people like you and me. It's a fairly safe surgery, but the risk of death still exists for you, albeit a small one.

Can we strap you down to a table against your will and forcibly remove one of your kidneys to give it to me?

Why or why not?

[Neutraligon]

"I can't come up with a proper argument, nor are my appeals to emotion working anymore so I'll just jump to stupid and crazy hypotheticals."

That is not the truth at all. That is merely the definition of what is being demanded here. I could post tons of links to articles with intellectual arguments against abortion, but you would dismiss all of my sources as "biased" and "riddled with errors".

So why not post stuff that isn't riddled with errors or biased? Of course you could actually try to source your stuff, and stop your appeals to emotion. The fact is my morals are not your morals, and my feelings are not your feelings, thus attempting to appeal to emotions like you have been doing will not work.

[Laurasia]

That is not the truth at all. That is merely the definition of what is being demanded here. I could post tons of links to articles with intellectual arguments against abortion, but you would dismiss all of my sources as "biased" and "riddled with errors".

I ask this a lot, but I'm going to ask you because I don't think I have before.

I have total renal failure. I need a kidney or I'm going to die. You're a match, and matches are extremely rare for people like you and me. It's a fairly safe surgery, but the risk of death still exists for you, albeit a small one.

Can we strap you down to a table against your will and forcibly remove one of your kidneys to give it to me?

Why or why not?

There is a difference between abortion and between life-saving surgery. Abortion is the termination of a human life, within the womb of another person. Surgery, on the other hand, involves an effort to save life. Individuals, who find that they are a match for someone else, freely cooperate together to have the necessary treatments performed. It is recognized that no one can be forced to adhere to such procedures. As regards to abortion, there are alternatives. Alternatives in that the child can be given up for adoption, that the woman can use birth control, etc. Abortions can be permitted if the woman's health is in absolute jeopardy, or if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. But anything beyond that is illogical and wrong. You cannot compare saving a person's life to destroying it.

[Laurasia]

That is not the truth at all. That is merely the definition of what is being demanded here. I could post tons of links to articles with intellectual arguments against abortion, but you would dismiss all of my sources as "biased" and "riddled with errors".

So why not post stuff that isn't riddled with errors or biased? Of course you could actually try to source your stuff, and stop your appeals to emotion. The fact is my morals are not your morals, and my feelings are not your feelings, thus attempting to appeal to emotions like you have been doing will not work.

But that is the problem. I can post legitimate sources, and you will still find fault with it. You will deride every one of my claims, and tell me, in a snarky voice, to "Try better next time" or "Stop using weak appeals". Cruelty is no way to win an argument.

[Galloism]

There is a difference between abortion and between life-saving surgery. Abortion is the termination of a human life,

Actually, abortion is the termination of support from another person's body. Death is the inevitable result of such termination of support.

within the womb of another person. Surgery, on the other hand, involves an effort to save life. Individuals, who find that they are a match for someone else, freely cooperate together to have the necessary treatments performed. It is recognized that no one can be forced to adhere to such procedures. As regards to abortion, there are alternatives. Alternatives in that the child can be given up for adoption, that the woman can use birth control, etc. Abortions can be permitted if the woman's health is in absolute jeopardy, or if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. But anything beyond that is illogical and wrong. You cannot compare saving a person's life to destroying it.

So my life doesn't matter to you?

You don't value all life enough to force people against their will to use their own bodies to save the lives of others?

[Pandeeria]

So why not post stuff that isn't riddled with errors or biased? Of course you could actually try to source your stuff, and stop your appeals to emotion. The fact is my morals are not your morals, and my feelings are not your feelings, thus attempting to appeal to emotions like you have been doing will not work.

But that is the problem. I can post legitimate sources, and you will still find fault with it. You will deride every one of my claims, and tell me, in a snarky voice, to "Try better next time" or "Stop using weak appeals". Cruelty is no way to win an argument.

Appeals to emotion and far-fetched hypotheticals are no way to win an argument too.

Go ahead and bring us some of your sources. It will be better than what you're presenting right now.

[Neutraligon]

So why not post stuff that isn't riddled with errors or biased? Of course you could actually try to source your stuff, and stop your appeals to emotion. The fact is my morals are not your morals, and my feelings are not your feelings, thus attempting to appeal to emotions like you have been doing will not work.

But that is the problem. I can post legitimate sources, and you will still find fault with it. You will deride every one of my claims, and tell me, in a snarky voice, to "Try better next time" or "Stop using weak appeals". Cruelty is no way to win an argument.

We may, we may not. And if we find fault with it it is your job to find an explain where we are wrong when it comes to the faults we found, that is how debate works. I say your source is wrong or misleading or whatever for thus and such a reason. You say here is the problem with that argument. Then I try and find fault with your rebuttal. As it is all you are doing is giving up and so making your own argument incredibly weak, without support, and done by appealing to emotions that we simply do not share.

Your argument that I should not support abortion because I could have been aborted is an appeal to emotion. Considering I would not want my mother to be forced to bear me, however it fails because my answer to that is "so"? You say it is immoral (another appeal to emotion), I say no it isn't as my morals do not say it is immoral. You say but abortion is disgusting (another appeal to emotion), I say "so" and all surgeries are disgusting, and that many earlier abortions are more like miscarriages.

[Genivaria]

So why not post stuff that isn't riddled with errors or biased? Of course you could actually try to source your stuff, and stop your appeals to emotion. The fact is my morals are not your morals, and my feelings are not your feelings, thus attempting to appeal to emotions like you have been doing will not work.

But that is the problem. I can post legitimate sources, and you will still find fault with it. You will deride every one of my claims, and tell me, in a snarky voice, to "Try better next time" or "Stop using weak appeals". Cruelty is no way to win an argument.

You have yet to do so.