Oppinions on abortion?

[Nulono]

Oh, it doesn't? I guess all those aborted fetuses are secretly alive, waiting to jump up and yell "SURPRISE!". Then we can all laugh at this silly misunderstanding.

No, because they lac coherent brain function. They feel no pain, they have no thoughts. They have no emotion.

You might as well agonise about the pain you're going to cause the egg next time you make omelets.

Lacking coherent brain function doesn't mean you can't be killed.

I'm not asking for punishment for sex,

Yes, you are. And, specifically, only for women. If they are unlucky or careless, they deserve to be enslaves as incubators for almost a year.

No. I am asking for a women not to kill their children.

just punishment for prolicide.

Really? You'd have unwilling fathers jailed if their girlfriends aborted?

Or is it just the women.

Huh? If the father kills the child, yes I would have him jailed. I wouldn't jail him just for his girlfriend aborting.

In my eyes, abortion should be legal.

The pro-life people can claim it kills children all they like, but I have yet to see them give me a proper reason to actually care about that.

A proper reason to care about millions of innocent deaths?

Everyone? Even to save their life?

Yes. 'saving your life' is generally just a medical opinion,[sic] plenty of people have gone against it and lived.

Medical opinion is the best we have to go on.

[Grave_n_idle]

Lacking coherent brain function doesn't mean you can't be killed.

I can kill the engine on my car, just by turning the key.

See, you can use words for a lot of things that they don't really have any business being used for.

Like you're constant talk about 'killing children, when what we're actually talking about is aborting pregnancy.

If it lacks coherent brain function, 'killing' it is no more meaningful than 'killing' cancer - because it doesn't have a life.

No. I am asking for a women not to kill their children.

You've been a lot more insistent than just asking them.

Huh? If the father kills the child, yes I would have him jailed. I wouldn't jail him just for his girlfriend aborting.

Why? He's half responsible, isn't he?

[The Kangaroo Republic]

You know, I've always found abortion if it's not in case of rape or when the mother's life is in danger, or otherwise when the baby will be born with seriously debilitating traits weird. Really, sex makes you pregnant, isn't it obvious? If you don't want to get pregnant, fuck with a condom or something. To prevent is better than to cure. Why should we kill an unborn baby because somebody's too lazy to just fuck with a condom?

[UCUMAY]

You know, I've always found abortion if it's not in case of rape or when the mother's life is in danger, or otherwise when the baby will be born with seriously debilitating traits weird. Really, sex makes you pregnant, isn't it obvious? If you don't want to get pregnant, fuck with a condom or something. To prevent is better than to cure. Why should we kill an unborn baby because somebody's too lazy to just fuck with a condom?

Birth control fails. Accidents happen.

[Neurotic Pandas]

Indeed, a proper reason to care about "millions" of "innocent" deaths. partly because;
A: millions, that makes it a statistic, not something personal. not that a fetus has any personality for as far as we know.
B: innocent? really? why put labels like "innocent" on something that is not even born yet, and, as such, has yet to do anything worth putting a label on?

[Lackadaisical2]

Lacking coherent brain function doesn't mean you can't be killed.

I can kill the engine on my car, just by turning the key.

See, you can use words for a lot of things that they don't really have any business being used for.

Like you're constant talk about 'killing children, when what we're actually talking about is aborting pregnancy.

If it lacks coherent brain function, 'killing' it is no more meaningful than 'killing' cancer - because it doesn't have a life.

actually it has much more than a life it has a soul*nods*

No. I am asking for a women not to kill their children.

You've been a lot more insistent than just asking them.

As it should be.

Huh? If the father kills the child, yes I would have him jailed. I wouldn't jail him just for his girlfriend aborting.

Why? He's half responsible, isn't he?

Only in your fantasy land.

[Grave_n_idle]

You know, I've always found abortion if it's not in case of rape or when the mother's life is in danger, or otherwise when the baby will be born with seriously debilitating traits weird. Really, sex makes you pregnant, isn't it obvious? If you don't want to get pregnant, fuck with a condom or something. To prevent is better than to cure. Why should we kill an unborn baby because somebody's too lazy to just fuck with a condom?

Because appeals to emotion, claims about what 'everyone knows', and nonsensical assertions are so much better than actual argument.

[The Kangaroo Republic]

You know, I've always found abortion if it's not in case of rape or when the mother's life is in danger, or otherwise when the baby will be born with seriously debilitating traits weird. Really, sex makes you pregnant, isn't it obvious? If you don't want to get pregnant, fuck with a condom or something. To prevent is better than to cure. Why should we kill an unborn baby because somebody's too lazy to just fuck with a condom?

Birth control fails. Accidents happen.

Hmmm, true dat. I guess that's kind of an issue when condoms uhm...break, and that that would mean that they have to present it as evidence and all and that it could just be exploited as it's not possible to determine WHEN it broke...

[The Kangaroo Republic]

You know, I've always found abortion if it's not in case of rape or when the mother's life is in danger, or otherwise when the baby will be born with seriously debilitating traits weird. Really, sex makes you pregnant, isn't it obvious? If you don't want to get pregnant, fuck with a condom or something. To prevent is better than to cure. Why should we kill an unborn baby because somebody's too lazy to just fuck with a condom?

Because appeals to emotion, claims about what 'everyone knows', and nonsensical assertions are so much better than actual argument.

Ooooh, sarcasm? You hurt my feelings soo...sooo badly.

[Lackadaisical2]

Because appeals to emotion, claims about what 'everyone knows', and nonsensical assertions are so much better than actual argument.

Ooooh, sarcasm? You hurt my feelings soo...sooo badly.

Its like anal with your ego.

[The Kangaroo Republic]

Ooooh, sarcasm? You hurt my feelings soo...sooo badly.

Its like anal with your ego.

Hmmmm...anal

[Grave_n_idle]

Because appeals to emotion, claims about what 'everyone knows', and nonsensical assertions are so much better than actual argument.

Ooooh, sarcasm? You hurt my feelings soo...sooo badly.

It was easier to treat the whole post with derision, than to go through and explain how contraception fails, sex isn't always strictly consensual or well thought-out, not everyone understands the ramifications of their actions, that consent to sex is NOT the same as consent to pregnancy, that sex doesn't intrinsically 'make you pregnant', or that - regardless of ALL that - no argument has YET been made that really justifies why any of those things would make it 'right' to force a human being to donate their body and bodily resources to a third-party entity, based on that entity's unstated need.

But you can have hurt feelings. I can't stop you.

[Nulono]

Lacking coherent brain function doesn't mean you can't be killed.

I can kill the engine on my car, just by turning the key.

See, you can use words for a lot of things that they don't really have any business being used for.

Like you're constant talk about 'killing children, when what we're actually talking about is aborting pregnancy.

If it lacks coherent brain function, 'killing' it is no more meaningful than 'killing' cancer - because it doesn't have a life.

A tumor most certainly can be killed, as can a tree, or a sea star, or a bacterium. Not having brain function does not mean the organism isn't alive; to say as much would be a biological absurdity.

No. I am asking for a women not to kill their children.

You've been a lot more insistent than just asking them.

If they do kill their children, yes I think something should be done about that.

Huh? If the father kills the child, yes I would have him jailed. I wouldn't jail him just for his girlfriend aborting.

Why? He's half responsible, isn't he?

Half responsible for the death? Of course not. She's the one who went to the abortion clinic to have the kid killed.

You know, I've always found abortion if it's not in case of rape or when the mother's life is in danger, or otherwise when the baby will be born with seriously debilitating traits weird. Really, sex makes you pregnant, isn't it obvious? If you don't want to get pregnant, fuck with a condom or something. To prevent is better than to cure. Why should we kill an unborn baby because somebody's too lazy to just fuck with a condom?

Birth control can fail. You know that, right?

Indeed, a proper reason to care about "millions" of "innocent" deaths. partly because;
A: millions, that makes it a statistic, not something personal. not that a fetus has any personality for as far as we know.
B: innocent? really? why put labels like "innocent" on something that is not even born yet, and, as such, has yet to do anything worth putting a label on?

A: A million deaths are a million times worse than one death. And since when does not having a personality negate your right to live?
B: Innocence isn't a label we put on actions. A person is innocent if they haven't done anything to make them guilty.

I can kill the engine on my car, just by turning the key.

See, you can use words for a lot of things that they don't really have any business being used for.

Like you're constant talk about 'killing children, when what we're actually talking about is aborting pregnancy.

If it lacks coherent brain function, 'killing' it is no more meaningful than 'killing' cancer - because it doesn't have a life.

actually it has much more than a life it has a soul*nods*

Where is this soul? What is its purpose? Can you demonstrate its existence in any way?

[The Kangaroo Republic]

Ooooh, sarcasm? You hurt my feelings soo...sooo badly.

It was easier to treat the whole post with derision, than to go through and explain how contraception fails, sex isn't always strictly consensual or well thought-out, not everyone understands the ramifications of their actions, that consent to sex is NOT the same as consent to pregnancy, that sex doesn't intrinsically 'make you pregnant', or that - regardless of ALL that - no argument has YET been made that really justifies why any of those things would make it 'right' to force a human being to donate their body and bodily resources to a third-party entity, based on that entity's unstated need.

But you can have hurt feelings. I can't stop you.

You know, not knowing that sex can make you pregnant kind of makes me think of this one person who tried to dry her dog in a microwave after it was bathed and was then surprised that it exploded. (or was it a cat?)

[Nulono]

You know, I've always found abortion if it's not in case of rape or when the mother's life is in danger, or otherwise when the baby will be born with seriously debilitating traits weird. Really, sex makes you pregnant, isn't it obvious? If you don't want to get pregnant, fuck with a condom or something. To prevent is better than to cure. Why should we kill an unborn baby because somebody's too lazy to just fuck with a condom?

Because appeals to emotion, claims about what 'everyone knows', and nonsensical assertions are so much better than actual argument.

I didn't see any appeal to emotion, though I didn't really see an argument either. TKR seems to be arguing not that abortion is wrong, but that it's "weird".

Birth control fails. Accidents happen.

Hmmm, true dat. I guess that's kind of an issue when condoms uhm...break, and that that would mean that they have to present it as evidence and all and that it could just be exploited as it's not possible to determine WHEN it broke...

Exploited how? Is there something wrong with abortion?

Ooooh, sarcasm? You hurt my feelings soo...sooo badly.

It was easier to treat the whole post with derision, than to go through and explain how contraception fails, sex isn't always strictly consensual or well thought-out, not everyone understands the ramifications of their actions, that consent to sex is NOT the same as consent to pregnancy, that sex doesn't intrinsically 'make you pregnant', or that - regardless of ALL that - no argument has YET been made that really justifies why any of those things would make it 'right' to force a human being to donate their body and bodily resources to a third-party entity, based on that entity's unstated need.

But you can have hurt feelings. I can't stop you.

Are you DENYING that pregnancy is caused by sex?

More like -9.8 m/s/s.

That's the acceleration...

Yes, acceleration due to gravity.

It was easier to treat the whole post with derision, than to go through and explain how contraception fails, sex isn't always strictly consensual or well thought-out, not everyone understands the ramifications of their actions, that consent to sex is NOT the same as consent to pregnancy, that sex doesn't intrinsically 'make you pregnant', or that - regardless of ALL that - no argument has YET been made that really justifies why any of those things would make it 'right' to force a human being to donate their body and bodily resources to a third-party entity, based on that entity's unstated need.

But you can have hurt feelings. I can't stop you.

You know, not knowing that sex can make you pregnant kind of makes me think of this one person who tried to dry her dog in a microwave after it was bathed and was then surprised that it exploded. (or was it a cat?)

I'm pretty sure that's an urban legend.

[The Kangaroo Republic]

-deleted snip-

[Grave_n_idle]

I'm sure you won't mind that I'm going to start highlighting appeal to emotion fallacies in red, to draw attention to how often it replaces an actual argument.

A tumor most certainly can be killed, as can a tree, or a sea star, or a bacterium. Not having brain function does not mean the organism isn't alive; to say as much would be a biological absurdity.

Indeed. And, unless you're about to argue that cutting down a tree, boiling water, or excising a tumour is murder - then you've actually made my own argument for me.

If they do kill their children, yes I think something should be done about that.

Just keeping you honest.

Half responsible for the death? Of course not. She's the one who went to the abortion clinic to have the kid killed.

But he let her.

But that wouldn't fit the agenda.

[Grave_n_idle]

I didn't see any appeal to emotion,

Really?

That explains a lot. Don't worry, I've now adopted a policy to help you with that.

Are you DENYING that pregnancy is caused by sex?

Man, actually reading shit before you open your mouth to respond? That's such a chore.

[Nulono]

I'm sure you won't mind that I'm going to start highlighting appeal to emotion fallacies in red, to draw attention to how often it replaces an actual argument.

A tumor most certainly can be killed, as can a tree, or a sea star, or a bacterium. Not having brain function does not mean the organism isn't alive; to say as much would be a biological absurdity.

Indeed. And, unless you're about to argue that cutting down a tree, boiling water, or excising a tumour is murder - then you've actually made my own argument for me.

I never said that all killing was murder. I was just responding to the ridiculous notion that abortion doesn't kill children.

If they do kill their children, yes I think something should be done about that.

Just keeping you honest.

Did I ever say I didn't think anything should be done?

Half responsible for the death? Of course not. She's the one who went to the abortion clinic to have the kid killed.

But he let her.

But that wouldn't fit the agenda.

How is he supposed to stop her? Should we also imprison everyone within a 2-mile radius of the abortion?

I didn't see any appeal to emotion,

Really?

That explains a lot. Don't worry, I've now adopted a policy to help you with that.

So far, you've highlighted "killing a child" and variations thereof, which are simple statements of fact. As opposed to claims of my supporting slavery, which are absurd strawmen meant to demonize my position.

Are you DENYING that pregnancy is caused by sex?

Man, actually reading shit before you open your mouth to respond? That's such a chore.

So sex DOES cause pregnancy. It doesn't always, and shooting someone doesn't always cause their death. But the causal relationship is still there.

[-St George]

That can still get her pregnant.

You must have a very shitty aim.

I really hope he has a source.

[Nulono]

You must have a very shitty aim.

I really hope he has a source.

Any semen that gets onto the vulva, even if there is no vaginal penetration, can make its way inside and fertilize the egg.

[Neurotic Pandas]

How is he supposed to stop her? Should we also imprison everyone within a 2-mile radius of the abortion?

A little something called "communication", in other words, by trying to talk her out of it, playing on the feelings of guilt she'll get, stuff like that.

[Grave_n_idle]

I never said that all killing was murder.

Indeed.

You plead special exception for it when it's contained ina uterus.

Thanks, once again, for making my point for me.

I was just responding to the ridiculous notion that abortion doesn't kill children.

Did I ever say I didn't think anything should be done?

What you said was: "No. I am asking for a women not to kill their children."

Which isn't true. Like I said, just keeping you honest.

How is he supposed to stop her? Should we also imprison everyone within a 2-mile radius of the abortion?

He should stay by her side until the pregnancy is terminated by birth.

So far, you've highlighted "killing a child"

Which is an appeal to emotion.

See, I knew this would pay off.

[Grave_n_idle]

So sex DOES cause pregnancy. It doesn't always, and shooting someone doesn't always cause their death. But the causal relationship is still there.

Before you get too involved in the one-man circle-jerk, try reading the post you were 'responding' to, and see if you can work out why you're wrong?

[Nulono]

How is he supposed to stop her? Should we also imprison everyone within a 2-mile radius of the abortion?

A little something called "communication", in other words, by trying to talk her out of it, playing on the feelings of guilt she'll get, stuff like that.

And if that fails?

I never said that all killing was murder.

Indeed.

You plead special exception for it when it's contained ina uterus.

Thanks, once again, for making my point for me.

No, I said that it's wrong to kill a human being. I never claimed abortion was murder.

I was just responding to the ridiculous notion that abortion doesn't kill children.

Did I ever say I didn't think anything should be done?

What you said was: "No. I am asking for a women not to kill their children."

Which isn't true. Like I said, just keeping you honest.

No, it is accurate. I am asking women not to kill their children.

How is he supposed to stop her? Should we also imprison everyone within a 2-mile radius of the abortion?

He should stay by her side until the pregnancy is terminated by birth.

And never sleep, or go to the bathroom? What, should he put her on a leash?

So far, you've highlighted "killing a child"

Which is an appeal to emotion.

See, I knew this would pay off.

No, it's a statement of fact.