Oppinions on abortion?

[Ashmoria]

Ask the Millions of blacks that have been murdered in the last few years what they think of their genocide... oh wait you can't, they're dead! http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=45553

>Millions of blacks that have been murdered in the last few years
>have been murdered
>murdered

its world net daily it has to be true.

.....

if that was in any way what the link was about.

[Dempublicents1]

I respect the argument that all human beings should be willing to donate of their bodies to preserve the life of another and see how it would then be applied to abortion if we first make the assumption that an embryo/fetus is a person. I vehemently disagree with it, but I respect it.

Of course, very few people are actually willing to make that argument. Most people in favor of forced pregnancy argue that pregnant women, and only pregnant women, should be forced to do so.

In the case of pregnancy, unfortunately, there is only one person who can support the fetus: the mother.

In... what was it, Adam's? example, just because Adam refuses doesn't mean that the patient will die. Any person could donate a kidney, and there is no absolute requirement that Adam has to be the one to donate it.

Actually, that's precisely what it means. In an acute situation like that, you likely need a matching donor on hand. If you have one, and he refuses, the patient will almost certainly die. If you don't have one on hand, the patient will almost certainly die. Sure, there might be someone else on the planet who could conceivably donate, but that person is unknown and there isn't time to find them, so this sort of example is the closest you can get to the "only one person can do this" aspect of pregnancy.

[Great Nepal]

Has there ever been a good argument to be against abortion? You either get terrible arguments from people like Nulono or people who use religion as an argument.

I respect the argument that all human beings should be willing to donate of their bodies to preserve the life of another and see how it would then be applied to abortion if we first make the assumption that an embryo/fetus is a person. I vehemently disagree with it, but I respect it.

Of course, very few people are actually willing to make that argument. Most people in favor of forced pregnancy argue that pregnant women, and only pregnant women, should be forced to do so.

So - when are you going to donate both of your kidneys and all of your blood? There are many people waiting for it and may die without it.

[Nulono]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Sparta a Roman city-state? My memory in this area is sketchy at best.

Sparta was a conquered city, with no real autonomy. It was not the Sparta of pre-Rome.

Huh?

Sure, I consented to pulling the trigger, your Honor, but I cannot be held responsible for his death.

There is such a thing as accidental shootings...

When is murder excellent?

In self defense cases.

Many things have been legal and not harmed social cohesion, yet we changed them because they were wrong. Infanticide, slavery, sexism, ad astra.

Slavery, and sexism have effected social cohesion in the country. (Woman's suffrage ring a bell?)
Infanticide doesn't necessarily effect social cohension depending on the circumstances. I however can't not agree with it on a moral level because of abortion and the baby Moses laws.

1. And that would be manslaughter.
2. And that wouldn't be murder.
3a. By that logic, abortion effects social cohesion (pro-life movement ring a bell?).
3b. I can't agree with abortion on a moral level.

Has there ever been a good argument to be against abortion? You either get terrible arguments from people like Nulono or people who use religion as an argument.

I respect the argument that all human beings should be willing to donate of their bodies to preserve the life of another and see how it would then be applied to abortion if we first make the assumption that an embryo/fetus is a person. I vehemently disagree with it, but I respect it.

Of course, very few people are actually willing to make that argument. Most people in favor of forced pregnancy argue that pregnant women, and only pregnant women, should be forced to do so.

I'm just arguing that mothers should not kill their offspring.

1. It depends on why you're having the abortion. Very late term abortion can be an alternative to an early abortion. Not all options should be legalized for everything.
2. Because she violated the child's right to live.
3. Fine, whatever. Child, offspring, baby. My point is that it doesn't make sense to punish the fetus with death for the parents having sex.
4. Actually, I don't think I could've. I'd've likely been too squeamish. I would never consider it "excellent". It would be a tragic necessity at best.
5. Only those born in the US are citizens, yes, but the Constitution grants the right to live to persons, not citizens.
7. Regardless of whether we're a warrior cult, infanticidal Sparta still survived (until Rome as a whole fell). The argument could be made that it was the resistance to sexism and slavery that caused social harm, and that a rigid system of hierarchy is in and of itself healthy for society.

1. No it doesn't. There is no alternative to abortion because anything accomplishing the same thing (as in knowingly terminating pregnancy) IS an abortion. Only theoretical alternetives exist (removing and freezing fetuses, for example). And I never claimed ALL options should be legalized for everything. Just abortion.
2. You cannot cetegorically prove the fetus has a right to live. The law says it doesn't. Ethics are relative. Zero evidence.
3. It really doesn't, but again, it makes less sense (from societal cohesion standpoint) to force pregnancy.
4. Meh. Semantics really. There's always UCUMAY's example of self defense, too. But whatever. You agree enough.
5. What? No it doesn't. The Constitution only grants rights to citizens of the US, not persons. According to that logic people living in China are granted Constitutional rights by virtue of being people.
7. So Nazism is therefore healthy for society? A lack of cohesion can take more forms than civil war or chaos. Totalitarianism and oppression are also bad.

1. If a woman wants to have an abortion because she doesn't want to raise the child, infanticide IS an alternative.
2. So it's okay because it's legal?
3. Again, all I'm arguing against is prolicide.
4. Again, that wouldn't be murder, and it wouldn't be excellent.
5. "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
7. But it can't take the form of millions of people dieing?

Not necessarily. AND DON'T MAKE THAT EMOTE AT US.

If I feel like winking at you, I'm going to wink.

And yes, necessarily. It's irresponsible sex if proper precautions aren't taken to ensure that no one becomes PREGNANT--if a pregnancy is not wanted. If this were to happen, an abortion would be performed.

Fantastic. A child has been aborted because you were irresponsible. Excellent work.

Pregnancy can result from even responsible sex.

What right do you have to force a woman to put a newborn child up for adoption instead of drowning him in the bathtub?

Poor analogy. It is physically possible, through a legal procedure that poses no extra danger to the mother and does not require the death of the newborn, to transfer custody of a born child to another person.

No, I do not support it, because he's being made to save a life, not being told not to take one.

No more so than a pregnant woman being forced to take on similar/greater risks for an embryo/fetus. In the example, it is Adam's fault that someone else needs a kidney. As such, if that person does not get a kidney and dies, it is Adam's fault that they died.

Again, not being allowed to off your offspring != slavery.

It is when what you mean by "not being allowed to off your offspring" is "you should be used as an incubator against your will."

1. So if she can't find anyone to take the child, or if she doesn't want to wait for someone to take the child off her hands, she can kill him?
2. No, the pregnant woman is being told not to kill her offspring. There's a difference between killing someone and not saving them.
3. What I mean is exactly what I said. She should not be allowed to kill her offspring.

Ask the Millions of blacks that have been murdered in the last few years what they think of their genocide... oh wait you can't, they're dead! http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=45553

Am I supposed to care more about them because they're black?

I know a woman who got pregnant while on the pill, after she and her partner used both a sponge and a condom. If she had chosen to, would you have allowed her to have an abortion?

I don't approve of abortions. If I were this woman's friend (or sister, etc.) I'd express my displeasure with her decision. It's not my place to decide for anyone. /neutral answer

Would you decide for her if she wanted to abort late-term or commit infanticide?

I don't approve of abortions. If I were this woman's friend (or sister, etc.) I'd express my displeasure with her decision. It's not my place to decide for anyone. /neutral answer

It's not your place to comment on her life decisions either, and, unless you've been in that situation, you have no credibility.

What an absurd position. Do I have to own a plantation to oppose slavery? Do I be a parent to oppose child abuse? Do I have to be married to oppose spousal rape?

[The Atlantean Menace]

Ask the Millions of blacks that have been murdered in the last few years what they think of their genocide... oh wait you can't, they're dead! http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=45553

>Millions of blacks that have been murdered in the last few years
>have been murdered
>murdered

>implying that killing a living human being isn't murder

[Grave_n_idle]

>Millions of blacks that have been murdered in the last few years
>have been murdered
>murdered

>implying that killing a living human being isn't murder

Because it isn't, intrinsically or exclusively.

[Nulono]

>implying that killing a living human being isn't murder

Because it isn't, intrinsically or exclusively.

When is it murder to not kill a human being?

[Wiztopia]

>Millions of blacks that have been murdered in the last few years
>have been murdered
>murdered

>implying that killing a living human being isn't murder

Killing a fetus isn't murder.

[Great Nepal]

>Millions of blacks that have been murdered in the last few years
>have been murdered
>murdered

>implying that killing a living human being isn't murder

Human being is not a parasite.
Fetus is a parasite.
Fetus is not Human being.

[Rumbria]

I listen to the bible. As such, I am not pro life, or pro choice, but pro abortion -


"If a man begets a hundred children, and lives many years, so that the days of his years are many, but he does not enjoy life's good things, and also has no burial, I say that an untimely birth is better off than he. For it comes into vanity and goes into darkness, and in darkness its name is covered; moreover it has not seen the sun or known anything; yet it finds rest rather than he." (Ecclesiastes 6:3-5)

[Keronians]

>implying that killing a living human being isn't murder

Human being is not a parasite.
Fetus is a parasite.
Fetus is not Human being.

A human being is most certainly a parasite.

In any case, may I ask from where you got such a definition?

Because, to the best of my knowledge, even pro-choicers agree that foetii are humans; they just don't think they're persons.

[Great Nepal]

Human being is not a parasite.
Fetus is a parasite.
Fetus is not Human being.

A human being is most certainly a parasite.

Source that human being benefits at the expense of the other with no advantage to host?

In any case, may I ask from where you got such a definition?

Because, to the best of my knowledge, even pro-choicers agree that foetii are humans; they just don't think they're persons.

By using logic...

par·a·site/ˈparəˌsīt/Noun
1. An organism that lives in or on another organism (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the host's expense

Fetus is an organism that lives in another organism (woman) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the host's (mother's) expense.

[Wilfred Test]

I personally would never do it, but it should not be banned.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

Sparta was a conquered city, with no real autonomy. It was not the Sparta of pre-Rome.

Huh?

There is such a thing as accidental shootings...


In self defense cases.

Slavery, and sexism have effected social cohesion in the country. (Woman's suffrage ring a bell?)
Infanticide doesn't necessarily effect social cohension depending on the circumstances. I however can't not agree with it on a moral level because of abortion and the baby Moses laws.

1. And that would be manslaughter.
2. And that wouldn't be murder.
3a. By that logic, abortion effects social cohesion (pro-life movement ring a bell?).
3b. I can't agree with abortion on a moral level.

I respect the argument that all human beings should be willing to donate of their bodies to preserve the life of another and see how it would then be applied to abortion if we first make the assumption that an embryo/fetus is a person. I vehemently disagree with it, but I respect it.

Of course, very few people are actually willing to make that argument. Most people in favor of forced pregnancy argue that pregnant women, and only pregnant women, should be forced to do so.

I'm just arguing that mothers should not kill their offspring.

1. No it doesn't. There is no alternative to abortion because anything accomplishing the same thing (as in knowingly terminating pregnancy) IS an abortion. Only theoretical alternetives exist (removing and freezing fetuses, for example). And I never claimed ALL options should be legalized for everything. Just abortion.
2. You cannot cetegorically prove the fetus has a right to live. The law says it doesn't. Ethics are relative. Zero evidence.
3. It really doesn't, but again, it makes less sense (from societal cohesion standpoint) to force pregnancy.
4. Meh. Semantics really. There's always UCUMAY's example of self defense, too. But whatever. You agree enough.
5. What? No it doesn't. The Constitution only grants rights to citizens of the US, not persons. According to that logic people living in China are granted Constitutional rights by virtue of being people.
7. So Nazism is therefore healthy for society? A lack of cohesion can take more forms than civil war or chaos. Totalitarianism and oppression are also bad.

1. If a woman wants to have an abortion because she doesn't want to raise the child, infanticide IS an alternative.
2. So it's okay because it's legal?
3. Again, all I'm arguing against is prolicide.
4. Again, that wouldn't be murder, and it wouldn't be excellent.
5. "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
7. But it can't take the form of millions of people dieing?

If I feel like winking at you, I'm going to wink.

And yes, necessarily. It's irresponsible sex if proper precautions aren't taken to ensure that no one becomes PREGNANT--if a pregnancy is not wanted. If this were to happen, an abortion would be performed.

Fantastic. A child has been aborted because you were irresponsible. Excellent work.

Pregnancy can result from even responsible sex.

Poor analogy. It is physically possible, through a legal procedure that poses no extra danger to the mother and does not require the death of the newborn, to transfer custody of a born child to another person.



No more so than a pregnant woman being forced to take on similar/greater risks for an embryo/fetus. In the example, it is Adam's fault that someone else needs a kidney. As such, if that person does not get a kidney and dies, it is Adam's fault that they died.



It is when what you mean by "not being allowed to off your offspring" is "you should be used as an incubator against your will."

1. So if she can't find anyone to take the child, or if she doesn't want to wait for someone to take the child off her hands, she can kill him?
2. No, the pregnant woman is being told not to kill her offspring. There's a difference between killing someone and not saving them.
3. What I mean is exactly what I said. She should not be allowed to kill her offspring.

Ask the Millions of blacks that have been murdered in the last few years what they think of their genocide... oh wait you can't, they're dead! http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=45553

Am I supposed to care more about them because they're black?

I don't approve of abortions. If I were this woman's friend (or sister, etc.) I'd express my displeasure with her decision. It's not my place to decide for anyone. /neutral answer

Would you decide for her if she wanted to abort late-term or commit infanticide?

It's not your place to comment on her life decisions either, and, unless you've been in that situation, you have no credibility.

What an absurd position. Do I have to own a plantation to oppose slavery? Do I be a parent to oppose child abuse? Do I have to be married to oppose spousal rape?

1. But unlike abortion, alternatives to infanticide DO exist. Namely adoption.
2. Again, no. It should be legal because there is no logical reason for it to be illegal. Just because it happens to be legal already is irrelevant. I would hold the same opinion if the case was otherwise.
3. It's not prolicide unless a child is killed. Fetus=/=child.
4. Again, semantics. I have no more to say on it.
5. Which only applies if you're using the faulty logic of fetus=person.
7. Hmmm? What people?

[Blazedtown]

What do I think of abortion? The only way to get the best munchy food in the world. fetuses are amazing with peanut butter.

[Grave_n_idle]

Because it isn't, intrinsically or exclusively.

When is it murder to not kill a human being?

Do you mean "when is it NOT murder to kill a human being"?

That, at least, would make sense in the context of what went before...

And the answer would be 'whenever it is legal to kill that person'. Just for example.

[Dempublicents1]

I respect the argument that all human beings should be willing to donate of their bodies to preserve the life of another and see how it would then be applied to abortion if we first make the assumption that an embryo/fetus is a person. I vehemently disagree with it, but I respect it.

Of course, very few people are actually willing to make that argument. Most people in favor of forced pregnancy argue that pregnant women, and only pregnant women, should be forced to do so.

So - when are you going to donate both of your kidneys and all of your blood? There are many people waiting for it and may die without it.

(a) I said I respect the argument, not that I agree with it.
(b) I donate blood every 8-16 weeks. I am on the bone marrow registry and am listed as an organ donor.

I'm just arguing that mothers should not kill their offspring.

Yes, you keep saying that over and over again as if there are no further implications of that statement as you apply it to this discussion. This is the reason that I have basically no respect for you. You refuse to own your argument and it's implications. I could respect your argument if you were truly willing to own it.

[Simon Cowell of the RR]

Often times people simply use logic to justify what they feel. Or, in this case, they feel and use that to justify.

[Nulono]

>implying that killing a living human being isn't murder

Human being is not a parasite.
Fetus is a parasite.
Fetus is not Human being.

Human being is not a parasite.
Fetus is a human being.
Fetus is not a parasite.
http://l4l.org/library/notparas.html

I listen to the bible. As such, I am not pro life, or pro choice, but pro abortion -


"If a man begets a hundred children, and lives many years, so that the days of his years are many, but he does not enjoy life's good things, and also has no burial, I say that an untimely birth is better off than he. For it comes into vanity and goes into darkness, and in darkness its name is covered; moreover it has not seen the sun or known anything; yet it finds rest rather than he." (Ecclesiastes 6:3-5)

So we should follow whatever is in the Bible? *goes through Bible with an evil smirk*

Huh?


1. And that would be manslaughter.
2. And that wouldn't be murder.
3a. By that logic, abortion effects social cohesion (pro-life movement ring a bell?).
3b. I can't agree with abortion on a moral level.


I'm just arguing that mothers should not kill their offspring.


1. If a woman wants to have an abortion because she doesn't want to raise the child, infanticide IS an alternative.
2. So it's okay because it's legal?
3. Again, all I'm arguing against is prolicide.
4. Again, that wouldn't be murder, and it wouldn't be excellent.
5. "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
7. But it can't take the form of millions of people dieing?


Pregnancy can result from even responsible sex.


1. So if she can't find anyone to take the child, or if she doesn't want to wait for someone to take the child off her hands, she can kill him?
2. No, the pregnant woman is being told not to kill her offspring. There's a difference between killing someone and not saving them.
3. What I mean is exactly what I said. She should not be allowed to kill her offspring.


Am I supposed to care more about them because they're black?


Would you decide for her if she wanted to abort late-term or commit infanticide?


What an absurd position. Do I have to own a plantation to oppose slavery? Do I be a parent to oppose child abuse? Do I have to be married to oppose spousal rape?

1. But unlike abortion, alternatives to infanticide DO exist. Namely adoption.
2. Again, no. It should be legal because there is no logical reason for it to be illegal. Just because it happens to be legal already is irrelevant. I would hold the same opinion if the case was otherwise.
3. It's not prolicide unless a child is killed. Fetus=/=child.
4. Again, semantics. I have no more to say on it.
5. Which only applies if you're using the faulty logic of fetus=person.
7. Hmmm? What people?

1. There aren't alternatives to infanticide if she wants the baby dead, or at least off her hands right now.
2. Human rights aren't a logical reason?
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prolicide
4. That's not semantics.
5. You admit that the Constitution gives the right to live to persons and not citizens, however? Because the "all persons born" clause defines citizenship, not personhood.
7. The people dieing from abortion at a frequency of approximately 0.04 Hz.

When is it murder to not kill a human being?

Do you mean "when is it NOT murder to kill a human being"?

That, at least, would make sense in the context of what went before...

And the answer would be 'whenever it is legal to kill that person'. Just for example.

I meant what I said and I said what I meant.

So - when are you going to donate both of your kidneys and all of your blood? There are many people waiting for it and may die without it.

(a) I said I respect the argument, not that I agree with it.
(b) I donate blood every 8-16 weeks. I am on the bone marrow registry and am listed as an organ donor.

I'm just arguing that mothers should not kill their offspring.

Yes, you keep saying that over and over again as if there are no further implications of that statement as you apply it to this discussion. This is the reason that I have basically no respect for you. You refuse to own your argument and it's implications. I could respect your argument if you were truly willing to own it.

I am refusing to own the straw man you have set up, because it isn't my argument.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

1. Uhhh..yea, adoption. Don't worry, they will take the baby.
2. No.
3. Fair enough.
4. Whatever, I don't care anymore about that.
5. No, I don't. The Constitution ONLY gives rights to citizens as defined by the Constitution. You're right in your statement that the Constitution does not define personhood, but as Constitutional rights do not apply to all persons (only citizens) stating that all people have the right to life is quite irrelevant. If it did, Roe v Wade would have been a very different ruling.
7. Nobody's dieing from abortion. Except maybe through the occasional complication.

[Our Lady Skye Sweetnam]

I don't like abortion, but I'm not necessarily against it either. Personally, if I were a woman, it wouldn't be my choice because I don't want to kill something that's living, but that doesn't mean I want to stop other women from getting one.

[Mytandium]

In Mytandium, you must apply to a Democratic counsel that determines via vote whether or not you must keep or abort. The Majority get's the decision, for everything effects society, and thus everything must be put to a vote. La Muerte a Socrates!!

[The Murtunian Tribes]

In Mytandium, you must apply to a Democratic counsel that determines via vote whether or not you must keep or abort. The Majority get's the decision, for everything effects society, and thus everything must be put to a vote. La Muerte a Socrates!!

This is not an IC forum. We're talking about real life abortion here.

[Deppreeve]

What about rape survivors? (I refuse to use the word 'victim'.) Speaking as a rape survivor (at the tender age of 14), had I become pregnant as a result (I didn't, thankfully), there is no doubt in my mind that I would have terminated that pregnancy.
It's all very well these people who have not been in a situation like that (or in some cases are male and couldn't be) sitting there going "it's wrong" but there is a lot more to it than a girl or woman saying "okay I'll just get rid of it then". There is emotional and mental anguish in a decision such as that.
I think it's pretty disgusting that the anti-abortion brigade expect a girl to carry a stranger's child for nine months whatever age she may be or how traumatic the whole thing is. Some of those poor girls come out of abortion clinics and have the further distress of being called a murderer. Hasn't she been through enough?
I say, if you haven't been in the situation and do not know what it feels like, you should keep your mouth shut and not judge them, because you don't always know the circumstances of the pregnancy.

[Keronians]

What about rape survivors? (I refuse to use the word 'victim'.) Speaking as a rape survivor (at the tender age of 14), had I become pregnant as a result (I didn't, thankfully), there is no doubt in my mind that I would have terminated that pregnancy.
It's all very well these people who have not been in a situation like that (or in some cases are male and couldn't be) sitting there going "it's wrong" but there is a lot more to it than a girl or woman saying "okay I'll just get rid of it then". There is emotional and mental anguish in a decision such as that.
I think it's pretty disgusting that the anti-abortion brigade expect a girl to carry a stranger's child for nine months whatever age she may be or how traumatic the whole thing is. Some of those poor girls come out of abortion clinics and have the further distress of being called a murderer. Hasn't she been through enough?
I say, if you haven't been in the situation and do not know what it feels like, you should keep your mouth shut and not judge them, because you don't always know the circumstances of the pregnancy.

So then I say you can't say that murder is wrong because you've never been murdered. You should not judge murderers, because you don't always know the circumstances of the crime.